Farber v. Greenberg

3 Citing cases

  1. Pictures Corp. v. R. Davidge Film Lab

    7 Cal.App.2d 366 (Cal. Ct. App. 1935)   Cited 5 times

    There is no privity of contract in such case between the lessor and the assignee. ( Farber v. Greenberg, 98 Cal.App. 675 [ 277 P. 534].) The assignee is only liable for the rental or royalty during such time as he remained in possession of the property and received the benefits thereof.

  2. Allen v. Stellar

    106 Cal.App. 67 (Cal. Ct. App. 1930)   Cited 10 times
    In Allen v. Stellar, 106 Cal.App. 67, 68, 288 P. 855, 857, a judgment of dismissal following the sustaining of a demurrer was affirmed under similar circumstances.

    The opinion then goes on to discuss the deficiencies or the defects in the complaint. In Farber v. Greenberg, 98 Cal.App. 675 [ 277 P. 534], this court, on passing upon the failure of a party to ask leave to amend, held as follows: "Appellant also complains that the trial court abused its discretion in denying him the right to amend. The record does not show in what manner appellant desired to amend, what changes or additions he proposed to make to his complaint.

  3. City of Novato v. MCCE Development, LLC

    A127298, A128928 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 30, 2011)   Cited 1 times

    As the owner of lots four through seven, Morf became liable for a continuing breach of the covenants to repair the Subdivision and construct improvements. Morf contends that, even if this case involves a continuing breach of a covenant to repair, the case of Farber v. Greenberg (1929) 98 Cal.App. 675, holds that subsequent owners of property escape liability for a continuing breach. We disagree.