Reed & Co. v. Harshall
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco, and from an order denying a new trial. James M. Troutt, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.
This action was instituted for the purpose of recovering judgment for the sum of $403, alleged to be due for personal services rendered by plaintiff for defendant.
The answer, in addition to denying the validity of the claim set out in the complaint, pleads a counterclaim^ alleging that the plaintiff is indebted to defendant in the sum of $427.65 for services alleged to have been performed by defendant for plaintiff at the latter’s “special instance and request.”
The cause was tried by the court and the plaintiff given judgment, from which and the order denying defendant a new trial this appeal…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Crane v. . PowellNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
- Rowell v. . JanvrinNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
- Winslow v. GohransenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Himmelman v. HenryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- California Savings & Loan Society v. HarrisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- People v. GarrowCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
- Wilson v. MatteiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
- Riverdale Mining Co. v. WicksCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1910
- Kehrlein-Swinerton Construction Co. v. RapkenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1916
- Carpenter v. BradfordCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1913
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.