Legal Opinion

Dickey v. Kuhn

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 9, 1930No. Docket No. 7248PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WARD, J., pro tem.

John Dickey contracted to sell to A. Kuhn a restaurant for the agreed purchase price of $5,000. Dickey received $500 in cash and three promissory notes, executed and delivered by Kuhn and his wife to Dickey, the first for $500, the second for $500 and the third for $3,500. The last note was dated July 31, 1922, and payable January. 31, 1923. Kuhn took possession of the res taurant and paid the first $500 lióte. Prior to the due date of the second note Kuhn and his wife commenced a suit to cancel the notes, etc., upon the grounds of fraud and misrepresentation and failure of…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Doak v. BrusonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
  2. Melone v. RuffinoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
  3. Ladd & Tilton v. MasonOregon Supreme Court · 1882
  4. Holmes v. WarrenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  5. Allen v. ChatfieldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Canal-Randolph Anaheim, Inc. v. WilkoskiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
  2. Ersa Grae Corp. v. Fluor Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1991
  3. Glatt v. Bank of Kirkwood PlazaNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1986
  4. Lloyd v. KleefischCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
  5. Walnut Creek Pipe Distributors, Inc. v. Gates Rubber Co.California Court of Appeal · 1964

7 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