Opinion

Loving & Evans v. Blick

  • 33 Cal. 2d 603
  • 204 P.2d 23
  • 1949 Cal. LEXIS 220
Court
California Supreme Court
Filed
Mar 18, 1949
Status
Published
Author
Edmonds
On the bench
Spence, Edmonds, Shenk, Carter
Cited by
137 cases
Authority
More cited than 11.3%

“[T]he contract . . . was illegal and void because of [the contractors’] failure to comply with the licensing requirements.”

How later courts described this case

  • “[T]he contract . . . was illegal and void because of [the contractors’] failure to comply with the licensing requirements.”

Written by the judges who cited it.

Distinguished

  • Distinguished by Jones v. Humanscale Corp., 29 Cal. Rptr. 3d 881 (2005)

    Loving & Evans v. Blick, supra, 33 Cal.2d 603, is inapposite because it involved an arbitration agreement contained in an illegal construction contract executed by an unlicensed contractor.
    California Court of AppealJun 17, 2005Read it

The opinion

EDMONDS, J.

I concur in the judgment but do not join in that portion of the majority opinion which approves and reaffirms the decision in Gatti v. Highland Park Builders, Inc., 27 Cal.2d 687 [ 166 P.2d 265 ],

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.