Stein v. Leeman
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Further facts are stated in the opinion upon the former appeal, reported in 151 Cal. 220, [90 Pac. 536].
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
A re-examination of the questions involved in this case convinces the court of the soundness of the opinion and judgment rendered in Department.
To the contention, for the first time advanced in the petition for a rehearing, that Stein should be compelled to pay interest from the date of his tender, a complete answer is found in Ferrea v. Tubbs, 125 Cal. 687, [58 Pac. 308], and Wadleigh v. Phelps, 149 Cal. 642, [87 Pac. 93].
For the reasons given in the Department opinion, hereto appended, the judgment and order are affirmed.
“Shaw, J.: This is an appeal from the judgment and from an…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Boggs v. Merced Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1859
- Davis v. DavisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
- Smith v. BanghamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- Wadleigh v. PhelpsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
- Ferrea v. TubbsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Lockhart v. J. H. McDougall Co.California Supreme Court · 1923
- Walter G. Reese Co. v. HouseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Rusconi v. California Fruit ExchangeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
- G. S. Johnson Co. v. Nevada Packard Mines Co.District Court, D. Nevada · 1920
- Heinfelt v. ArthCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.