North Pacific Steamship Co. v. Terminal Investment Co.
California Court of Appeal
APPEALS from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco and from an order denying a motion for an order vacating and setting aside said judgment. George E. Crothers, Judge. Affirmed. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtWaste, P. J.
This action was brought by plaintiff, the tenant, to have a lease declared rescinded, because it claimed to be deprived of a material part of the consideration, which had failed, so it is alleged, through the fault of the lessor. Judgment was entered for the defendant. There are two appeals, one (No. 2954) from the order denying plaintiff’s motion to vacate the judgment, and the other (No. 2961) an appeal from the judgment. By stipulation, the appeals are considered together.
Defendant’s assignor leased to plaintiff the premises, No. 50 Market Street, San Francisco, to be used as a…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Agar v. WinslowCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- McDowell v. HymanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- McCall v. New York Life InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
- Skaggs v. EmersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875
- Voss v. SylvesterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Lee v. Placer Title Co.California Court of Appeal · 1994
- Giraud v. MilovichCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
- Tregoning v. ReynoldsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
- Sierad v. LillyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
- Dussin Investment Co. v. BloxhamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979