Legal Opinion

Wal-Noon Corp. v. Hill

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 27, 1975No. Civ. 14042PublishedCited by 65 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

PUGLIA, J.

Plaintiffs, lessees, and defendants, lessors, each appeal from a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered in an action seeking recovery under provisions of a lease. Plaintiffs challenge the trial court’s failure to award them full compensation pursuant to the lease and also to award them attorney’s fees under a provision in the lease. Defendants’ cross-appeal challenges the trial court’s decision awarding plaintiffs any damages at all in view of the court’s conclusion that plaintiffs breached the lease under which recovery was sought. In its intended decision, the trial court…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. California Lettuce Growers, Inc. v. Union Sugar Co.California Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Bliss v. California Cooperative ProducersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
  3. National Bank of California v. MinerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
  4. Sieber v. BlancCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  5. Lawrence v. ShuttCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969

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

3Cited by65 opinions

  1. Carma Developers (California), Inc. v. Marathon Development California, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Bradley v. Chiron Corp.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
  3. Shapiro v. Wells Fargo Realty AdvisorsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
  4. Hedging Concepts, Inc. v. First Alliance Mortgage Co.California Court of Appeal · 1996
  5. Lance Camper Manufacturing Corp. v. Republic Indemnity Co. of AmericaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996

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

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

Powered by the Exa API