Legal Opinion

Firth v. Richter

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 11, 1920No. Civ. No. 3353PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtConrey, P. J.

Action to recover damages resulting from breach of warranty. The defendant appeals from the judgment.

The action is based upon a. contract dated February 28, 1912, which, as written, was entered into between the defendant as party of the first part and. E. J. Wilson and J. P. Firth as parties of the second part. It was provided therein “that the party of the first part agrees to sell and the parties of the second part agree to buy nine hundred and ninety-six (996) Valencia orange trees, running in size y2 inch and up, said trees grown by O. M. Bert, near his pumping plant. Price to be paid for…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Polhemus v. HeimanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1873
  2. Shearer v. Park Nursery Co.California Supreme Court · 1894
  3. Ingalls v. AngellWashington Supreme Court · 1913
  4. Burge v. Albany Nurseries, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1917
  5. Rauth v. Southwest Warehouse Co.California Supreme Court · 1910

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Aced v. Hobbs-Sesack Plumbing Co.California Supreme Court · 1961
  2. Southern California Enterprises, Inc. v. D. N. & E. Walter & Co.California Court of Appeal · 1947
  3. Miller v. Germain Seed & Plant Co.California Supreme Court · 1924
  4. Wyatt v. Cadillac Motor Car DivisionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
  5. Crawford v. DuncanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923

22 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