Legal Opinion

Linney v. Challacombe

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 2, 1931No. Docket No. 6938PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BISHOP, J., pro tem.

Plaintiff recovered judgment for $750, based on the finding that he had rendered services, as an attorney, at the defendant’s special instance and request. The defendant’s sole contention, but variously expressed, on this his appeal, is that this finding is not supported by the evidence. With this contention we do not agree.

First of all, defendant insists that the agreement between himself and plaintiff was embodied in several writings, that these express the entire contract, by virtue of the provisions of section 1625 of the Civil Code and section 1856 of the Code of…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Buckner v. A. Leon & Co.California Supreme Court · 1928
  2. Greathouse v. DalenoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
  3. Whittier v. Home Sav. Bank of L.A.California Supreme Court · 1911

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Gardiner v. BurketCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
  2. Kohl v. Lytle Creek Water & Improvement Co.California Court of Appeal · 1938

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

Powered by the Exa API