California Supreme Court· 10/1/1941
Haigler v. Donnelly
Citations
- 18 Cal. 2d 674
- 117 P.2d 331
- 1941 Cal. LEXIS 409
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “defendant, acting as agent for plaintiffs, received stipulated sum of money belonging to plaintiffs and refused to account for it after a proper demand.”
- “money cannot be the subject of an action for conversion unless a specific sum capable of identification is involved (Baxter v. King, 81 Cal.App. 192 [253 P. 172])”
- A broker under a net sales contract is not entitled to compensation unless he successfully negotiates a sale for more than the net amount
- “[E]xemplary damages may not be recovered in an 2 || action based upon a contractual obligation even though the breach of contract is willful or 3 malicious.”
- punitive damages are 5 recoverable for conversion
- punitive damages are 5 recoverable for conversion
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Traynor
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
56 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Fletcher v. Western National Life InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1970-08-07· cited 412×
- Ward v. TaggartCalifornia Supreme Court· 1959-03-12· cited 340×
- Gagne v. BertranCalifornia Supreme Court· 1954-10-19· cited 253×
- Kim v. Westmoore Partners, Inc.California Court of Appeal· 2011-11-29· cited 126×
- Ledingham v. Blue Cross Plan for Hospital Care of Hospital Service Corp.Appellate Court of Illinois· 1975-06-12· cited 113×
- Voris v. LampertCalifornia Supreme Court· 2019-08-15· cited 102×
- Weiss v. MarcusCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1975-09-23· cited 90×
- Chelini v. NieriCalifornia Supreme Court· 1948-08-30· cited 89×
- Wills v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.S.D. California· 1961-12-29· cited 85×
- Michelson v. HamadaCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1994-10-27· cited 84×
- Software Design & Application, Ltd. v. Hoefer & Arnett, Inc.California Court of Appeal· 1996-08-29· cited 83×
- Welco Electronics, Inc. v. MoraCalifornia Court of Appeal· 2014-01-23· cited 81×
- Steiner v. RowleyCalifornia Supreme Court· 1950-08-11· cited 79×
- PCO, Inc. v. Christensen, Miller, Fink, Jacobs, Glaser, Weil & ShapiroCalifornia Court of Appeal· 2007-04-30· cited 79×
- People v. Brian S.California Court of Appeal· 1982-04-09· cited 63×
- Ferraro v. Pacific Finance Corp.California Court of Appeal· 1970-05-29· cited 55×
- All-West Design, Inc. v. BoozerCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1986-06-30· cited 44×
- Foster v. KeatingCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1953-09-29· cited 38×
- Sanowicz v. BacalCalifornia Court of Appeal· 2015-02-26· cited 38×
- Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. BladeCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1956-02-29· cited 36×
Cites
15 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Philpott v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court· 1934-10-01· cited 137×
- McCall v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court· 1934-10-01· cited 76×
- Los Angeles Drug Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court· 1936-12-29· cited 26×
- Wetzell & Griffith v. WagonerMissouri Court of Appeals· 1890-05-19· cited 19×
- Wood v. BlaneyCalifornia Supreme Court· 1895-05-24· cited 17×
- Burnett v. PottsIllinois Supreme Court· 1908-10-26· cited 16×
- Arzaga v. VillalbaCalifornia Supreme Court· 1890-08-01· cited 14×
- Wolverton v. TuttleOregon Supreme Court· 1908-04-14· cited 13×
- Culbertson v. SheridanSupreme Court of Kansas· 1914-11-14· cited 13×
- Baumgarten v. Alliance Assur. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern California· 1908-01-27· cited 12×
- Lyles v. PerrinCalifornia Supreme Court· 1897-12-14· cited 11×
- Futrell v. ReevesCourt of Appeals of Kentucky· 1915-06-08· cited 10×
- Gilmore v. BolioMichigan Supreme Court· 1911-05-08· cited 10×
- Fitzpatrick v. ClarkCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1938-06-03· cited 4×
- Jones v. SmithAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York· 1910-01-15· cited 1×
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.