Legal Opinion
Tuck v. Gudnason
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 5, 1936No. Civ. 9645PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
McNUTT, J., pro tem.
Krist Gudnason was an extensive dealer in women’s wash dresses which were made up for him by shops in San Francisco and Oakland from pattern materials furnished by him. Elsie Tuck, a Chinese, operated a small hemstitching and dressmaking shop in Oakland, working for no person in particular. Gudnason had her fabricate some dresses, patterns for which he furnished, and was so pleased with her workmanship that he proposed that she abandon her business and obtain large quarters with sufficient machinery to devote her time exclusively to the manufacture of his products, upon a…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Seymour v. OelrichsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- Spinney v. DowningCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Bartlett Springs Co. v. Standard Box Co.California Court of Appeal · 1911
- Comer v. Associated Almond GrowersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
- Standard Oil Co. v. WoolnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
3Cited by15 opinions
- Monarco v. Lo GrecoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
- Ruinello v. MurrayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
- Beverage v. Canton Placer Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1955
- Wolfe v. Wallingford Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1938
- Grant v. LongCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.