Legal Opinion

Groobman v. Callahan

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 19, 1932No. Docket No. 7076Published

1Opinion of the Court

TAPPAAN, J., pro tem.

Appellant, who was plaintiff and cross-defendant below, in April, 1928, made with' respondent a contract to purchase from respondent walnuts to be grown during that season. The terms of this contract are somewhat uncertain, and this uncertainty, it would seem, was one of the causes leading to this controversy. Appellant in his complaint alleged a breach of this contract by respondent in that respondent had delivered walnuts of inferior quality and further, that respondent had delivered only seven and one-half tons of walnuts while he had contracted to deliver fifty tons.…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. King v. California BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925

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

Powered by the Exa API