Rosati v. Heimann
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtMoore, P. J.
Appellant is an art collector and connoisseur ; respondent is an artist. The connoisseur possessed a collection of rare paintings including one by the master, Leonardo da Yinci, which had been despoiled by time and neglect. It required treatment by an efficient artist for its restoration and for its exhibition with the works of the great master. Appellant employed respondent to perform such services and to purchase other paintings by the ingenious artists of olden times. The relationship thus created continued from April 1944 to June 1950. Respondent purchased materials and paintings and…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Morgan Clark v. MillsapCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
- Brodie v. BarnesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
- Gardner v. RutherfordCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
- Lewis v. GrunbergCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
- Wieczorek v. the Texas Co.California Court of Appeal · 1941
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Rossi v. ZappaterraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
- Huntoon v. HurleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
- Western Specialty Co. v. Clairemont Construction Co.California Court of Appeal · 1962
- State v. ByrneMontana Supreme Court · 1960
- Burdette v. Rollefson Construction Co.California Supreme Court · 1959
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.