Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Citation
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Parent Document
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Jurisdiction
- California (state)
- Effective Date
- 1980-07-24
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2115139/schulman-v-vera/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (69)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
- Schulman v. Vera, 108 Cal. App. 3d 552 (1980)
Full Text
615 charsLessees’ arguments that the three-day notice to pay or quit given them on June 2, 1978, was defective are three. First, it is urged that the trial court erroneously determined that the additional rent on account of property taxes was due April 10, 1978. Lessees assert that inasmuch as the lease failed to specify the date or dates upon which the additional rent was due and the lease was drafted by lessors’ attorneys, the ambiguity should have been resolved favorably to lessees. However, the trial court based its determination on conflicting extrinsic evidence including testimony by lessees that they knew they