20 Cited authorities

Windsor Mills, Inc. v. Collins Aikman Corp.
25 Cal.App.3d 987 (Cal. Ct. App. 1972) Cited 139 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that as "the outward manifestation or expression of assent is the controlling factor," an offeree, "knowing that an offer has been made to him but not knowing all of its terms, may be held to have accepted, by his conduct, whatever terms the offer contains."
Lawrence v. Walzer Gabrielson
207 Cal.App.3d 1501 (Cal. Ct. App. 1989) Cited 49 times
Explaining the doctrine of ejusdem generis
Alexander v. Superior Court
114 Cal.App.4th 723 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003) Cited 25 times 2 Legal Analyses
In Alexander, the contracts had been entered into, and the obligations incurred, in Santa Clara County, and the contracts designated the place of performance as Santa Clara County.
Hawk v. State Bar
45 Cal.3d 589 (Cal. 1988) Cited 43 times
In Hawk, the California Supreme Court held that taking a deed of trust in a client's real property created an adverse interest because the deed of trust could be foreclosed without judicial scrutiny.
Arntz Builders v. Superior Court
122 Cal.App.4th 1195 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004) Cited 9 times 3 Legal Analyses
No. A106242 September 30, 2004 Appeal from the Superior Court of Contra Costa County, No. C04-00101, Terence L. Bruiniers, Judge. Bell, Rosenberg Hughes, Roger M. Hughes, Kimble R. Cook and Nancy L. Sandifer for Petitioner. No appearance for Respondent. Farella Braun Martel, B. Scott Douglass, Anthony D. Giles, Bridget K. Kaman; Silvano B. Marchesi, County Counsel, and David F. Schmidt, Deputy County Counsel, for Real Party in Interest. POLLAK, J. In this writ proceeding we consider the validity
Mosby v. Superior Court
43 Cal.App.3d 219 (Cal. Ct. App. 1974) Cited 12 times
Dealing with proper county within California for suit against individuals and their wholly owned unincorporated business
Ward Mfg. Co. v. Miley
131 Cal.App.2d 603 (Cal. Ct. App. 1955) Cited 31 times
In Ward Mfg. Co. v. Miley, supra, 131 Cal.App.2d 603, the complaint filed in Los Angeles County contained a cause of action alleging an account stated in Los Angeles County, and a cause of action setting forth a common count for goods sold and delivered in Los Angeles County.
Anaheim Extrusion Co. v. Superior Court
170 Cal.App.3d 1201 (Cal. Ct. App. 1985)
Docket No. G002788. July 11, 1985. COUNSEL Kadison, Pfaelzer, Woodard, Quinn Rossi, J. David Oswalt, Lawrence A. Cox and Barry B. Kaufman for Petitioner. No appearance for Respondent. Glen H. Schwartz for Real Party in Interest. OPINION TROTTER, P.J. Anaheim Extrusion Company challenges respondent's order granting Classic Molding Company's motion for a change of venue, as well as the order granting Classic's request for reasonable expenses and attorneys fees. Anaheim filed a complaint against real
Kaluzok v. Brisson
27 Cal.2d 760 (Cal. 1946) Cited 41 times
In Kaluzok v. Brisson, supra, 27 Cal.2d 760, plaintiffs alleged that in reliance on defendants' fraudulent representations they were induced to purchase real property and to execute and deliver a note secured by a trust deed, as a result of which they suffered damages.
Braunstein v. Superior Court
225 Cal.App.2d 691 (Cal. Ct. App. 1964) Cited 7 times
Docket No. 21755. March 19, 1964. PROCEEDING in mandamus to compel the Superior Court of Monterey County to transfer a cause of action to another county. Gordon Campbell, Judge. Peremptory writ granted. Harry E. Sokolov for Petitioner. No appearance for Respondent. Hoge, Fenton, Jones Appel, Lewis L. Fenton and Sam L. Foster for Real Party in Interest. BRAY, P.J. Petition for writ of mandate to compel the Superior Court of Monterey County to transfer cause to Superior Court of Los Angeles County
Section 395 - Action for injury to person or personal property or death from wrongful act or negligence; offer or provision of goods, services, loans or extension of credit for family or household use
Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 395 Cited 471 times
Assuming that that section applies to corporations
Section 396b - Notice or motion for order transferring action or proceeding; expenses and attorney's fees to prevailing party
Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 396b Cited 125 times
Allowing fee and cost order against non-prevailing party in venue dispute, considering whether offer to stipulate to venue was reasonably made and rejected and whether motion or selection of venue was made in good faith

Notice of Hearing no fee

20 Cited authorities

Holding that as "the outward manifestation or expression of assent is the controlling factor," an offeree, "knowing that an offer has been made to him but not knowing all of its terms, may be held to have accepted, by his conduct, whatever terms the offer contains."

Explaining the doctrine of ejusdem generis

In Alexander, the contracts had been entered into, and the obligations incurred, in Santa Clara County, and the contracts designated the place of performance as Santa Clara County.

In Hawk, the California Supreme Court held that taking a deed of trust in a client's real property created an adverse interest because the deed of trust could be foreclosed without judicial scrutiny.

Dealing with proper county within California for suit against individuals and their wholly owned unincorporated business

In Ward Mfg. Co. v. Miley, supra, 131 Cal.App.2d 603, the complaint filed in Los Angeles County contained a cause of action alleging an account stated in Los Angeles County, and a cause of action setting forth a common count for goods sold and delivered in Los Angeles County.

In Kaluzok v. Brisson, supra, 27 Cal.2d 760, plaintiffs alleged that in reliance on defendants' fraudulent representations they were induced to purchase real property and to execute and deliver a note secured by a trust deed, as a result of which they suffered damages.

Assuming that that section applies to corporations

Allowing fee and cost order against non-prevailing party in venue dispute, considering whether offer to stipulate to venue was reasonably made and rejected and whether motion or selection of venue was made in good faith