George v. Burdusis
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, J.
— By their complaint, the appellants charged Aleck Burdusis, who is their former partner, with unfair competition following the sale to them of his interest in the partnership business. They were denied both injunctive relief and damages. Aleck Burdusis fared no better on his cross-complaint, which was based upon certain asserted activities of the appellants and false representations made by them, as a result of which he claims to have suffered loss of business and consequent damage. He did not appeal.
For a number of years the appellants were coowners of Stone Linen Supply Company. Under this…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Empire Steam Laundry v. LozierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
- Guggenhime & Co. v. LamantiaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
- New Method Laundry Co. v. MacCannCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- Pasadena Ice Co. v. ReederCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
- Avocado Sales Co. v. WyseCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Diodes, Inc. v. FranzenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
- Continental Car-Na-Var Corp. v. MoseleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Aetna Building Maintenance Co. v. WestCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
- Chanay v. ChittendenArizona Supreme Court · 1977
- Sarkes Tarzian, Inc. v. Audio Devices, Inc.District Court, S.D. California · 1958
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.