Legal Opinion

Barkhaus v. Producers Fruit Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided October 10, 1923No. Sac. No. 3383PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMyers, J.

The petition herein for a transfer after decision by the district court of appeal was granted largely because it was believed that certain questions which were necessary to the determination of the instant case were involved to some extent in two other cases then pending before this court. (In re Okahara, 191 Cal. 353 [216 Pac. 614], and Woodsend v. Chatom, 191 Cal. 72 [214 Pac. 965],) We have arrived at substantially the same conclusions herein which were reached by the district court of appeal, and we shall make free use herein of the opinion of that court, which was prepared by Mr.…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Davis v. VidalTexas Supreme Court · 1912
  2. Dunlap v. BullardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1881
  3. In Re OkaharaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
  4. Ash v. Soo Sing LungCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
  5. United States v. HickeySupreme Court of the United States · 1873

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

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Treadwell v. NickelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  2. Hartman Ranch Co. v. Associated Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1937
  3. Pittam v. City of RiversideCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  4. Kendis v. CohnCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
  5. Dixie Fire & Casualty Co. v. Esso Standard Oil Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1965

20 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