Legal Opinion
McCormick Saeltzer Co. v. Haidlen
California Court of Appeal
Decided December 9, 1931No. Docket Nos. 4352, 4353, 4354, 4355PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPreston, P. J.
The above-entitled actions were consolidated and tried together by the court without a jury. Judgments went in favor of the plaintiffs in all the cases. From these judgments defendant Southern Surety Company alone prosecutes this appeal.
These actions are by various material claimants against Southern Surety Company, A. Haidlen Company, a partnership, and other formal defendants, growing out of materials and merchandise furnished in connection with the performance of a contract, dated June 23, 1927, made by A. Haidlen Company with the department of public works of the state of California, for…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- French v. PowellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
- Sherman v. Am. Sur. Co. of N.Y.California Supreme Court · 1918
- Bricker v. Rollins & JareckiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
- Associated Oil Co. v. Commary-Peterson Co.California Court of Appeal · 1917
- Ryan v. ShannahanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Bernard v. Indemnity InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
- Scott Co. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003
- Christie v. Commercial Casualty Insurance Co.California Court of Appeal · 1935
- Shoshoni Lumber Co. v. Fidelity & Deposit Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1933
- George F. Kennedy, Inc. v. Miles & Sons Construction DivisionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970