Holt Manufacturing Co. v. Thornton
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcFARLAND, J.
This is an action to recover the balance alleged to be due plaintiff upon a contract which it made with defendant to harvest sixteen hundred acres of grain. It is conceded that tif the amount which would be due plaintiff for the harvesting, according to the contract price, $645.04 remains unpaid; but defendant set up a counterclaim of $13,320 for damages alleged to have been suffered by him on account of the failure of the plaintiff to perform the con tract, and prayed judgment for that amount against plaintiff. The jury found for the defendant in the sum of $1,500, for which amount judgment…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Shoemaker v. AckerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
3Cited by18 opinions
- Seymour v. OelrichsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- California Lettuce Growers, Inc. v. Union Sugar Co.California Supreme Court · 1955
- Hensler v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- Noble v. TweedyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
- Imperial Valley Land Co. v. Globe Grain & Milling Co.California Supreme Court · 1921
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.