Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Food & Grocery Bureau v. Garfield

California Supreme Court

Decided June 25, 1941No. L. A. 17877PublishedCited by 31 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PULLEN, J., pro tem.

Petition for writ of supersedeas to suspend the operation of a preliminary injunction pending an appeal from it by petitioner.

Petitioner operates ten retail drug stores in widely separated trade areas in Los Angeles County. The present action was brought to restrain him from using merchandising methods which are allegedly violative of the Unfair Practices Act (Deering’s Gen. Laws, Vol. 2, Act 8781, p. 4157), with complaint directed particularly against the practice of issuing trading stamps to purchasers, on the ground that such stamps constitute a “gift” within the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Schwarz v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  2. People v. Associated Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1930
  3. Hulbert v. California Etc. Cement Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
  4. Ohaver v. FenechCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  5. Feinberg v. One Doe Co.California Supreme Court · 1939

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

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. Western Electroplating Co. v. HennessCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  2. Caminetti v. Guaranty Union Life Ins. Co.California Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Dabney v. PhilleoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
  4. Saltonstall v. SaltonstallCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
  5. Food & Grocery Bureau v. GarfieldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942

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

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

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API