CALIFORNIA CANNING PEACH GROWERS v. HARKEY (1937)

District Court of Appeal, Third District, California.

CALIFORNIA CANNING PEACH GROWERS v. HARKEY et al.†

Civ. 5801.

Decided: July 20, 1937

Agnew & Boekel and Carroll Single, all of San Francisco, and J. Francis Good, of Oroville, for appellant. Seth Millington, of Gridley, and Jerome D. Peters, of Chico, for respondents.

On petition for rehearing.

The same questions are presented upon respondents' petition for rehearing herein that were presented and considered in the petition for rehearing in an opinion denying the petition for rehearing in the case of the above–named plaintiff against E. R. Williams, et al. (Cal.App.) 70 P. (2d) 650, and need not be repeated herein.

In addition to the opinion filed in this cause, and what we have set forth in the opinion denying the petition for rehearing in the Williams Case, is controlling upon all the issues presented by the petition for rehearing in this cause.

The petition for rehearing is therefore denied.

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network