California Court of Appeal· 4/28/1987
Clothesrigger, Inc. v. GTE Corp.
Citations
- 191 Cal. App. 3d 605
- 236 Cal. Rptr. 605
- 1987 Cal. App. LEXIS 1631
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- concluding application of California law was constitutionally permissible where defendant’s principal offices were in California and the allegedly fraudulent misrepresentations emanated from California
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Kremer, Lewis
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
51 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Mazza v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc.Ninth Circuit· 2012-01-12· cited 510×
- Linder v. Thrifty Oil Co.California Supreme Court· 2000-08-09· cited 361×
- Diamond Multimedia Systems, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court· 1999-01-04· cited 235×
- Lazar v. Hertz Corp.California Court of Appeal· 1999-02-17· cited 159×
- Stangvik v. Shiley Inc.California Supreme Court· 1991-11-21· cited 137×
- Sullivan v. Oracle Corp.California Supreme Court· 2011-06-30· cited 131×
- Wershba v. Apple Computer, Inc.California Court of Appeal· 2001-07-31· cited 128×
- Caro v. Procter & Gamble Co.California Court of Appeal· 1993-08-31· cited 114×
- Norwest Mortgage, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1999-04-28· cited 85×
- Tellez v. Rich Voss Trucking, Inc.California Court of Appeal· 2015-09-30· cited 78×
- Osborne v. Subaru of America, Inc.California Court of Appeal· 1988-02-16· cited 74×
- Bartold v. Glendale Federal BankCalifornia Court of Appeal· 2000-06-19· cited 63×
- Chavez v. Blue Sky Natural Beverage Co.N.D. California· 2010-06-18· cited 55×
- Reyes v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1987-11-19· cited 54×
- Cattie v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.S.D. California· 2007-03-21· cited 51×
- Rutledge v. Hewlett-Packard Co.California Court of Appeal· 2015-07-22· cited 51×
- Markow v. RosnerCalifornia Court of Appeal· 2016-10-04· cited 50×
- Parkinson v. Hyundai Motor AmericaC.D. California· 2008-12-12· cited 43×
- Keegan v. American Honda Motor Co.C.D. California· 2012-06-12· cited 43×
- Simon v. Philip Morris Inc.E.D. New York· 2000-12-07· cited 42×
Cites
28 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Blank v. KirwanCalifornia Supreme Court· 1985-08-01· cited 1,989×
- Phillips Petroleum Co. v. ShuttsSupreme Court· 1985-06-26· cited 1,691×
- Crawford v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court· 1935-04-30· cited 851×
- D'AMICO v. Board of Medical ExaminersCalifornia Supreme Court· 1974-03-19· cited 841×
- Vasquez v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court· 1971-05-10· cited 453×
- Daar v. Yellow Cab Co.California Supreme Court· 1967-11-15· cited 412×
- Nestle v. City of Santa MonicaCalifornia Supreme Court· 1972-04-28· cited 385×
- Davey v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court· 1897-03-22· cited 313×
- Hurtado v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court· 1974-05-31· cited 308×
- Mercer v. PerezCalifornia Supreme Court· 1968-01-23· cited 262×
- Bernhard v. Harrah's ClubCalifornia Supreme Court· 1976-03-02· cited 199×
- Richmond v. Dart Industries, Inc.California Supreme Court· 1981-06-15· cited 189×
- Lawless v. CalawayCalifornia Supreme Court· 1944-04-06· cited 188×
- Martha C. Kamm, a Widow v. California City Development Company, a CorporationNinth Circuit· 1975-01-09· cited 176×
- People v. RusselCalifornia Supreme Court· 1968-08-14· cited 119×
- Hurtado v. Statewide Home Loan Co.California Court of Appeal· 1985-05-06· cited 64×
- Lazar v. Hertz Corp.California Court of Appeal· 1983-05-19· cited 50×
- Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court· 1950-02-28· cited 45×
- DeYoung v. Del Mar Thoroughbred ClubCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1984-08-20· cited 35×
- Rose v. Medtronics, Inc.California Court of Appeal· 1980-06-19· cited 33×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.