Farnum v. Clarke
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Charles W. Slack, E. D. Larkins, and U. T. Clotfelter, for Appellants.
1Opinion of the CourtLorigan, J.
The appeals are here presented, one from a judgment for defendant after a demurrer to an amended and supplemental complaint had been sustained and plaintiffs had refused to amend, the other from an order dissolving a temporary injunction which had been granted when the action was commenced. The demurrer which was sustained was a general one, and the validity of the order with reference to it is the first question presented for determination.
The amended and supplemental complaint alleges, that on December o, 1899, the plaintiffs and the defendant John A. Benson entered into a contract, which…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Easton v. MontgomeryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Burks v. DaviesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Olive Land & Development Co. v. OlmsteadU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern California · 1900
- Marshall v. CaldwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
- Porter v. JenningsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Long Beach Drug Co. v. United Drug Co.California Supreme Court · 1939
- McKevitt v. City of SacramentoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- Miller v. DyerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Anderson v. Neal Institutes Co.California Court of Appeal · 1918
- Britschgi v. McCallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.