Legal Opinion

Canning v. Fibush

California Supreme Court

Decided October 19, 1888No. 11709PublishedCited by 11 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Alameda County. The facts are stated in the opinion,

1Opinion of the Court

Hayne, C.

Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment of nonsuit.

The evidence shows that the plaintiff leased the premises in controversy to the defendants for the term of three months from June 1, 1885. At the time of the agreement there was some talk of leasing them the premises after that at a higher rent, if the parties could agree. But this amounted to nothing more than that they would see whether a renewal could not be arranged at the end of the term. On the 6th of August the plaintiff caused the defendants to be served with a notice to the effect that if they occupied the store after September…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Stoppelkamp v. MangeotCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Colyear v. TobrinerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
  2. Chuck v. Quan Wo Chong & Co.California Supreme Court · 1891
  3. Lawer v. MittsWyoming Supreme Court · 1925
  4. McKissick v. AshbyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  5. Kuhn v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899

6 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