Dixon Mobile Homes, Inc. v. Walters
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
EVANS, J.
Plaintiff and cross-defendant (hereafter appellant) appeals from an adverse judgment in favor of defendant and cross-complainant (hereafter respondent). The trial of the action was bifurcated; the court without a jury considered the question of whether to apply Nevada or California law, and a jury thereafter heard evidence and rendered a verdict on appellant’s complaint for recovery of personal property and damages and respondent’s cross-complaint seeking rescission, restitution, and compensatory and exemplary damages. The trial court ruled that California law, specifically…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Hurtado v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
- Reich v. PurcellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
- Kasel v. Remington Arms Co.California Court of Appeal · 1972
- Millbrae Assn. for Residential Survival v. City of MillbraeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
- Perkins v. Benguet Consolidated Mining Co.California Court of Appeal · 1942
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Bullis v. Security Pacific National BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
- Aaron Senne v. Kansas City Royals BaseballCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2019
- Arno v. Club Med Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
- Application Group, Inc. v. Hunter Group, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1998
- Myra Strassberg v. New England Mutual Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1978
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.