Kloke v. Pongratz

How courts have described this case

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

• finding the plaintiff’s conduct was inconsistent with his belief that defendant was a co-partner where the plaintiff made no demand for payment under the lease at issue

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Persson v. Smart Inventions, Inc.
  California Court of Appeal· 2005-01-19· cited 73×
• Smalley v. Baker
  California Court of Appeal· 1968-06-11· cited 39×
• Raphael v. Raphael
  California Court of Appeal· 1949-05-20· cited 38×
• Constans v. Ross
  California Court of Appeal· 1951-08-30· cited 32×
• Smith v. Grove
  California Court of Appeal· 1941-10-24· cited 16×
• Harden v. Skinner & Hammond
  California Court of Appeal· 1955-02-15· cited 15×
• Facit-Addo, Inc. v. Davis Financial Corp.
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1982-05-04· cited 6×
• In re Brunson & Bunch
  S.D. California· 1948-09-14· cited 1×

Cites

1 case in this archive is cited by this case.

• Associated Piping & Engineering Co. v. Jones
  California Court of Appeal· 1936-10-15· cited 17×