Legal Opinion

Kurokawa v. Saroyan

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 27, 1928No. Docket No. 6392PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.

The above action arose out of certain farming operations carried on by the defendants in Fresno County in connection with which the plaintiffs were employed. The complaint by separate causes of action alleged claims for labor furnished and moneys advanced to the-defendants, with a further claim for money had and received to the use of the plaintiffs. Defendants alleged in their answer among other defenses payments on account, together with several counterclaims against the plaintiffs. The trial court—a trial by jury having been waived—found that the balance of plaintiff’s claims…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Treadwell v. NickelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  2. Kirk v. CulleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  3. Silvers v. GrossmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  4. Slama Tire Protector Co. v. RitchieCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1916
  5. Manley v. Pacific Mill & Timber Co.California Court of Appeal · 1926

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Parker v. Shell Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1946
  2. Carlson, Collins, Gordon & Bold v. BanducciCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
  3. Gibson v. EasleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
  4. County of Los Angeles v. RansohoffCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
  5. Silva v. LinnemanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API