Legal Opinion
Osborne v. Cal-Am Financial Corp.
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 24, 1978No. Civ. 50778PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
FLEMING, J.
The Osbornes (hereinafter plaintiff) as seller brought an action for damages for buyer’s refusal to purchase real property. The jury returned a verdict for defendant buyer, but the trial court granted plaintiff a new trial on the ground that the court had abused its discretion (1) by admonishing plaintiff and his counsel in front of the jury, and (2) by refusing to allow plaintiff on rebuttal to call an expert witness to testify to the fair market value of the real property at the date of breach. In its memorandum opinion granting a new trial the court indicated it was…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Parsons v. Bristol Development Co.California Supreme Court · 1965
- Mercer v. PerezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- Mattei v. HopperCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
- Royer v. CarterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
- Miller v. National American Life InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Seaman's Direct Buying Service, Inc. v. Standard Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1984
- Photovest Corporation, an Indiana Corporation, and Cross-Appellant v. Fotomat Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, and Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1979
- People v. AultCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
- People v. AultCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
- Cousineau v. WalkerAlaska Supreme Court · 1980
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.