Legal Opinion

Dunham, Carrigan & Hayden Co. v. Thermoid Rubber Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 1, 1927No. Docket No. 5805PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKoford, P. J.

Appellant is a manufacturer of automobile tires. Toward the end of the year 1919 it solicited respondent as jobber and distributor to carry as its leader, and push the sale of, Thermoid tires and tubes manufactured by appellant. A written contract was signed by the parties in December, 1919, which by its terms covered the period ending December 31, 1920. The contract contained numerous provisions regulating the course of conduct of the parties in their business relationship, such as discounts, terms of settlement, extent of territory, exchange of goods, adjustments, and the like, together…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Seymour v. OelrichsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
  2. Carpy v. DowdellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
  3. Walsh v. StandartCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
  4. Flint v. GiguiereCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
  5. Price v. Smith Manufacturing Co.California Court of Appeal · 1921

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Silva v. Providence Hospital of OaklandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  2. People v. DeysherCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
  3. Grant v. LongCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
  4. Medina v. Van Camp Sea Food Co.California Court of Appeal · 1946
  5. Pecarovich v. BeckerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952

6 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