Steel v. Thompson
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.
This action was brought to recover the sum of $375 deposited by appellants with respondent to secure the payment of rent under the terms of a lease executed by the latter to the former. As stated by appellants, “the only point relied upon for a reversal of the judgment in this case is that it appears conclusively that there was a surrender of the lease by the tenants and an unqualified acceptance by the landlord of such surrender.” If the last statement be true, then, as the trial court stated, the plaintiffs or appellants herein are entitled to the $375. In relation to this controverted…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Welcome v. HessCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Bradbury v. HigginsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Baker v. Eilers Music CompanyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1915
- Triest & Co. v. GoldstoneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- Oliver v. LoydonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
3Cited by11 opinions
- Kreling v. WalshCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
- Buchanan v. BantaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
- Rognier v. HarnettCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
- Strei v. BrooksCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
- Gallagher v. McMannCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.