Legal Opinion
Hertz Driv-Ur-Self Stations, Inc. v. Schenley Distilleries Co.
California Court of Appeal
Decided August 18, 1953No. Civ. No. 15505PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBray, J.
From a judgment in favor of plaintiff in the sum of $11,379.80, defendant appeals.
Questions Presented
1. By the 1945 and subsequent schedules, was the requirement of purchase by defendant abrogated?
2. Was there an anticipatory breach of the contract by plaintiff ?
Facts
In 1941 the parties entered into a written agreement by which plaintiff leased to defendant over a period of years, trucks, tractors and trailers “described in Schedule A, attached hereto, together with any additional Schedule A’s attached hereto, which are made a part hereof by reference thereto the same as if rewritten at…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Gold Mining & Water Co. v. SwinertonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
- Atkinson v. District Bond Co.California Court of Appeal · 1935
- Valley Construction Co. v. City of CalistogaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
- Reid v. JohnsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
3Cited by7 opinions
- Whitney Investment Co. v. Westview Development Co.California Court of Appeal · 1969
- Guerrieri v. SeveriniCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
- City of Buena Park v. BoyarCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- Pacific Coast Engineering Company, a Corporation v. Merritt-Chapman & Scott Corporation, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1969
- STC, INC. v. City of BillingsMontana Supreme Court · 1975
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.