Legal Opinion

Weintraub v. Weingart

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 8, 1929No. Docket No. 5294PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BURNELL, J., pro tem.

This is an appeal from a judgment in favor of plaintiff in an action in unlawful detainer. The cause of action set up in the complaint was grounded upon the alleged assignment by the defendant and appellant Weingart of a lease containing a covenant against assignment. The answer denied that there had been any assignment and by way of a second defense plead estoppel.

The grounds urged by appellants in seeking a reversal of the judgment are, first, that the evidence is insufficient to support the finding that the lease had been assigned; second, that it is insufficient to…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Wheaton v. North British and Merchantile InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  2. Young v. BradleySupreme Court of the United States · 1880
  3. Craig v. SummersSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1891
  4. Morffew v. S.F. & San Rafael R.R.California Supreme Court · 1895
  5. Eakle v. IngramCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Seneris v. HaasCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Quintal v. Laurel Grove HospitalCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
  3. Grewe v. Mount Clemens General HospitalMichigan Supreme Court · 1978
  4. Stanhope v. Los Angeles College of ChiropracticCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  5. Hill v. Citizens National Trust & Savings Bank of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937

19 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