Legal Opinion

Budaeff v. Huber

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 20, 1961No. Civ. 19359PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDuniway, J.

Respondents, plaintiffs below, obtained a judgment in an action in ejectment, and defendants appeal. Respondents were landlords and appellants were tenants under a written lease. The action was for possession and past due rents, and the judgment substantially follows the prayer of the complaint. It is claimed that the judgment must be reversed for the following reasons: (1) The evidence does not support the findings as to a demand for the rent; (2) the evidence does not support the finding that respondents did not waive their right to terminate the lease; (3) the court erroneously failed to…

2Cases cited39 opinions

  1. City of Pasadena v. PorterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  2. People v. KlopstockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Samuels v. SingerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
  4. McGlynn v. MooreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
  5. Jones v. MariaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Canal-Randolph Anaheim, Inc. v. WilkoskiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
  2. Wetherbee v. United Insurance Co. of AmericaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
  3. Valov v. TankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1985
  4. Silva v. GVF Cannery, Inc. (In Re GVF Cannery, Inc.)United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. California · 1995
  5. Canal-Randolph Anaheim, Inc. v. WilkoskiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978

2 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