Legal Opinion

Bouey v. Porterfield

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 11, 1929No. Docket No. 3660PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JAMISON, J., pro tem.

This action was tried upon the amended complaint of respondent which contained three counts. In the first count thereof respondent seeks rescission of a contract entered into between himself and defendants Porterfield and Deyot upon the ground of fraud and fraudulent representations. In the second count he seeks judgment against defendants for money had and received, and in the third count he seeks to set aside the contract and for return of money advanced by him thereon upon the ground of fraud practiced upon him by said Porterfield and Deyot, and for failure of…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Slaughter v. Goldberg, Bowen & Co.California Court of Appeal · 1915
  2. Ruhl v. MottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  3. Teague v. HallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  4. Rheingans v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
  5. California Credit & Collection Co. v. CarpenterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Wilson v. Rigali & VeselichCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
  2. Church of the Merciful Saviour v. Volunteers of America, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1960
  3. Longway v. NewberyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  4. Vaughn v. Certified Life InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
  5. Cox v. KlatteCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938

2 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