Thueson v. U-Haul International, Inc.
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BRUINIERS, J. *
Following trial by the court, judgment was entered against plaintiff and appellant David O. Thueson and in favor of defendants and respondents U-Haul Co. of California (doing business as U-Haul Co. of San Francisco) (U-Haul), on appellant’s claims that his dealership agreement was improperly terminated. His claims rested on the premise that the dealership agreement was a franchise, subject to the provisions of the California Franchise Investment Law (CFIL) (Corp. Code, § 31000 et seq.), and the California Franchise Relations Act (CFRA) (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 20000 et…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Denham v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
- Ghirardo v. AntonioliCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
- Crocker National Bank v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1989
- Howard v. Owens CorningCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
- Finnie v. Town of TiburonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- 1-800-GOT JUNK? LLC v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
- Roberts v. C.R. England, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2011
- Century 21 Real Estate LLC v. All Professional Realty, Inc.District Court, E.D. California · 2012
- Absolute USA, Inc. v. Harman Professional, Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 2023
- Jack In The Box Inc. v. San-Tex Restaurants, Inc.District Court, W.D. Texas · 2021
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.