1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Cal.App.4th
  4. 8 Cal.App.4th
  5. 8 Cal.App.4th 759 (1992)
 

WILSON v. GENTILE

Docket No. B057235.

8 Cal.App.4th 759 (1992)

10 Cal. Rptr.2d 713

BRIAN WILSON, Plaintiff, Cross-defendant and Respondent, v. VON A. GENTILE, Defendant, Cross-complainant and Appellant.

Court of Appeals of California, Second District, Division Seven.

August 4, 1992.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

COUNSEL

Richard H. Benes for Defendant, Cross-complainant and Appellant.

Rosenfeld, Meyer & Susman, Kirk M. Hallam and David F. Graber for Plaintiff, Cross-defendant and Respondent.

OPINION

JOHNSON, J.

In this case we are asked to interpret a clause requiring an option to be exercised "within thirty (30) days prior to the expiration" of the option period. Appellant argues this language requires the option to be exercised "no later than" 30 days before the option period expires. We conclude this language instead allows the option to be exercised during...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases