I think it’s time we discussed Leatherbury v. Favel. We’ve never previously discussed the case, and this seems an appropriate occasion: I have a deadline to meet and you obviously have time on your hands or you wouldn’t be reading my stuff. So let’s do it.
Leatherbury v. Favel, (1951) 106 Cal.App.2d 112, is a great case. Unsung, but great. It’s not Brown v. Board great. It’s not even Palsgraf or International Shoe great. It didn’t change the law, much less history.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
