Legal Opinion

Sam Finman, Inc. v. Rokuz Holding Corp.

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 15, 1955No. Civ. 16176PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBray, J.

This appeal by plaintiff from an order granting change of venue from the city and county of San Francisco to the county of Los Angeles raises principally the question of whether .there was a contract between the parties entered into in San Francisco.

Record

Plaintiff’s complaint sought damages for an alleged breach of contract by defendant Rokuz Holding Corporation to lease certain San Francisco realty, or a breach by defendant Lyon * of a warranty that Lyon was authorized to bind Rokuz in said contract. Defendant Lyon moved to change the place of trial to Los Angeles on the ground that Lyon…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Bank of Yolo v. Sperry Flour Co.California Supreme Court · 1903
  2. Ferroni v. Pacific Finance Corp.California Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Wilson v. WhiteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
  4. Kaluzok v. BrissonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
  5. Crofts & Anderson v. JohnsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Peiser v. MettlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
  2. Ersa Grae Corp. v. Fluor Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1991
  3. Mosby v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
  4. Fletcher v. Nordesta Homes, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1961

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

Powered by the Exa API