Legal Opinion
Rathbun v. Hill
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 14, 1933No. Docket No. 4679PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PLUMMER, J., pro tem.
The plaintiff had judgment in this action for the recovery of a certain hay-baler, with an alternative judgment for the value thereof, in the sum of $641.66, in the event that recovery of the hay-baler could not be had, and also damages in the sum of $581 for the detention thereof. From this judgment the defendant I. G. Zumwalt alone appeals.
The record shows that on or about the tenth day of April, 1930, a conditional contract of sale of the hay-baler involved in this action was entered into between the defendant Zumwalt, as seller, and the defendant Hill, as purchaser,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Wilkinson v. SinghCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
- Conolley v. PowerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
- Booth v. Peoples Finance & Thrift Co.California Court of Appeal · 1932
- Andrews v. HoeslichWashington Supreme Court · 1907
- Griffith v. ReddickCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Minsky v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
- Stockton Morris Plan Co. v. Mariposa CountyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
- Rozen v. Redco CorporationSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1961
- Rozen v. Redco CorporationSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1961