Legal Opinion
Dameshghi v. Texaco Refining & Marketing, Inc.
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 25, 1992No. Docket Nos. D013074, D014129, D014481PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
HUFFMAN, J.
Plaintiff Michael Dameshghi appeals the judgments separately entered in favor of two groups of defendants and respondents, (1) Texaco Refining and Marketing, Inc., (Texaco), its individual employees, Gary Kirner and C. T. Trammell, and its franchisee, Gilbert Peet, and (2) the real estate brokers and escrow agents, Business Opportunities Unlimited, Inc. (B.O.U.), Joseph Tausch, Cynthia Tausch, and Ghassan El-Khoury (the broker/escrow defendants), who were involved in Dameshghi’s failed attempt to purchase Feet’s Texaco service station. The trial court granted a motion for…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- California Teachers Ass'n v. San Diego Community College DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1981
- Davey v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1897
- Gagne v. BertranCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
- Mann v. CracchioloCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
- Consumers Lobby Against Monopolies v. Public Utilities CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Trope v. KatzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
- Gilberd v. AC TRANSITCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
- Consolidated World Investments, Inc. v. Lido Preferred Ltd.California Court of Appeal · 1992
- Rennick v. O.P.T.I.O.N. Care, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
- Sweat v. HollisterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.