Legal Opinion

Pohl v. Mills

California Supreme Court

Decided August 1, 1933No. Docket No. Sac. 4485PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.

This action was brought by plaintiff for the purpose of rescinding four separate contracts for the leasing by him, with the option of perpetual renewal, of four roadside booths for the dispensing of nonintoxicating drinks, known as “Jumbo Lemons”, together with the exclusive territorial right to operate said Jumbo Lemons in the district designated in each separate contract. Plaintiff claims the right to rescind and cancel said contracts because of certain alleged misrepresentations and fraud practiced upon him by defendants which induced him to enter into said contracts. Defendants…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Bleistein v. Donaldson Lithographing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1903
  2. Spreckels v. GorrillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
  3. Ferguson v. KochCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  4. Sullivan v. HelbingCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
  5. Carr v. HowellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Rogers v. WardenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Everett v. GillilandNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Strand v. Librascope, IncorporatedDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1961
  4. Blackman v. HowesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
  5. Boas v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942

16 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