· 11/28/1984
Quigley v. Pet, Inc.
Citations
- 162 Cal. App. 3d 877
- 208 Cal. Rptr. 394
- 1984 Cal. App. LEXIS 2731
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- reversing judgment because parties were two commercial entities with “no special relationship”
- Chief Justice Bird concurred and dissented arguing for a more liberal application of the doctrine
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Woolpert
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced 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.