Legal Opinion
Jack Heskett Lincoln-Mercury, Inc. v. Metcalf
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 2, 1984No. Civ. 22978PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
REGAN, Acting P. J .
Plaintiff appeals from a judgment of dismissal entered after the trial court sustained without leave to amend defendants’ demurrer to plaintiff’s first amended complaint. We reverse.
Facts
For purposes of appeal, we treat as true all material facts properly pleaded in the complaint. (Thompson v. County of Alameda (1980) 27 Cal.3d 741, 746 [167 Cal.Rptr. 70, 614 P.2d 728, 12 A.L.R.4th 701].) We recite the gravamen of plaintiff’s causes of action as contained in its amended complaint.
On or about July 30, 1980, plaintiff and defendants entered into a contract for the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Thompson v. County of AlamedaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
- G.H.I.I. v. MTS, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1983
- Vater v. County of GlennCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
- Massey-Ferguson Credit Corp. v. CasaulongCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
- Stone v. JamesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- DaimlerChrysler Services North America, LLC v. OuimetteSupreme Court of Vermont · 2003
- Scott v. Ford Motor Credit Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1997
- State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. KeenanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1985
- Basin Construction Corp. v. Department of Water & PowerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
- Harrelson v. Carmax Auto Superstores California CA4/2California Court of Appeal · 2013
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.