Legal Opinion

Roullard v. Gray

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 20, 1918No. Civ. No. 2415PublishedCited by 12 opinions

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. H. Z. Austin, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtLennon, P. J.

This is an action for the recovery of a part of the purchase price of an automobile, brought by the assignee of the vendor. The defendant denied the purchase of the automobile. The trial court rendered judgment for the plaintiff and defendant appeals. The appellant sets ont numerous alleged errors of law in the admission of testimony, etc., and also contends that the evidence does not support the findings or the judgment.

The evidence shows that the automobile was sold by the plaintiff’s assignor to Hazel I. Gray, then the wife of the defendant herein; that an old automobile, the property of…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. California Savings & Loan Society v. HarrisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Uhlmann v. Kin DawOregon Supreme Court · 1920
  2. Rudneck v. Southern California Metal & Rubber Co.California Supreme Court · 1920
  3. Booth v. Montgomery Ward & Co.District Court, D. Nebraska · 1942
  4. Hall v. Citizens National Trust & Savings BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  5. Baugh v. LittleSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1929

7 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