Legal Opinion

Rusconi v. California Fruit Exchange

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 25, 1929No. Docket No. 3814PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THOMPSON (R. L.), J.

This is an appeal from a judgment in an action upon a fruit marketing contract to recover money alleged to have been wrongfully withheld by the respondent.

The respondent is a produce marketing corporation. June 1, 1917, the parties to this action executed a written contract by the terms of which the respondent agreed to promptly sell and market, as appellant’s agent, all his deciduous fruit which was to be delivered during a series of years, for a consideration expressed as follows: “for which [service] the Exchange shall deduct from the growers’ account sales 7% of the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Smith v. BanghamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
  2. Whelan v. SwainCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
  3. Stein v. LeemanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
  4. Fairchild v. CartwrightCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1918

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Farmers Cooperative Co. v. BirminghamDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1949
  2. Pry Corp. of America v. LeachCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  3. Taylor v. TaylorCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
  4. Seth v. Lew HingCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  5. Weil v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1954

11 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