Legal Opinion

Bailey v. Fox

California Supreme Court

Decided March 14, 1889No. 12592PublishedCited by 39 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Oourt of Stanislaus County, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtWorks, J.

On the fourth day of November, 1885, the appellant, being the owner of a stock of hardware and agricultural implements, sold a one-third interest therein to the respondent. The terms of sale were, that an inventory of the stock should be taken and completed on or before November 30, 1885, the same to be valued at net San Francisco wholesale prices, and when the value was thus ascertained, the value of the fixtures should be added, and the respondent should then pay the one third of the amount thereof as follows: Fifteen hundred dollars in cash, and the balance in two secured notes of equal…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Gould v. . Cayuga County National BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
  2. Cobb v. . HatfieldNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
  3. People Ex Rel. Cunningham v. RoperNew York Court of Appeals · 1866
  4. Foley v. CrowCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1872
  5. Barfield v. PriceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by39 opinions

  1. Woodard v. Glenwood Lumber Co.California Supreme Court · 1915
  2. Munson v. FishburnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  3. Ruhl v. MottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  4. Menefee v. OxnamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
  5. Sonnesyn v. AkinNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1905

34 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