Skip to main content
· 1/19/1886

Hagely v. Hagely

Citations

  • 68 Cal. 348
  • 9 P. 305
  • 1886 Cal. LEXIS 436

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • stating, in bid contest case, that “attorney fees could be recovered, not as an inherent part of the damages incurred by a frustrated bidder, but by establishing the requirements of the particular statute that authorizes attorney fees” (quotation marks and citation omitted)
  • stating, in bid contest case, that “attorney fees could be recovered, not as an inherent part of the damages incurred by a frustrated bidder, but by establishing the requirements of the particular statute that authorizes attorney fees” (quotation marks and citation omitted)
  • stating, in bid contest case, that “attorney fees could be recovered, not as an inherent part of the damages incurred by a frustrated bidder, but by establishing the requirements of the particular statute that authorizes attorney fees” (quotation marks and citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Searls

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.