Legal Opinion

Kuhn v. Dickey

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 18, 1924No. Civ. No. 4614PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSturtevant, J.

The plaintiffs commenced an action against the defendant to recover a judgment for damages alleged to have occurred by reason of false representations alleged to have been made by the defendant in the sale of a restaurant. The defendant interposed an answer and cross-complaint and asked a judgment for the balance due on two promissory notes evidencing the unpaid balance on the purchase. The trial court awarded the cross-complainant a judgment as prayed for and the plaintiffs have appealed.

The first point made by the appellants is a contention to the effect that many of the allegations…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Dickey v. KuhnCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
  2. Lewis Publishing Co. v. HendersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
  3. Dickey v. KuhnCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  4. Sam P. McCullough, Inc. v. DoggettSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1936
  5. Tipton v. TiptonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933

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

Powered by the Exa API