Fishel v. F.M. Ball Co., Inc.
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
BUCK, J., pro tem.
This is an action brought to recover a balance claimed to be due from defendant for services rendered by plaintiff as a salesman for defendant. Plaintiff recovered judgment in the sum of $2,710, and defendant appeals. The case was tried before the court without a jury. There was no conflict in the evidence that plaintiff was in the employ of the defendant during the time in question, and that he was paid by defendant during the time of his employment the sum of $200 per month. And the evidence also shows, without conflict, that there was some understanding between the…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- National Bank of Commerce v. City of New BedfordMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1900
- Mercantile Trust Co. v. Sunset Road Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1917
- Parsons v. EastonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
- Williams v. HawleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- People v. OwensCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Hammond Lumber Co. v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Prince v. HartingCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- City of Los Angeles v. DeaconCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
- Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Southern Pacific Co.California Court of Appeal · 1936
- Young v. Bates Valve Bag Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1942
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.