Legal Opinion

Ernst v. Searle

California Supreme Court

Decided May 29, 1933No. Docket No. S.F. 14397PublishedCited by 144 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.

A rehearing was granted in this case in order to give further consideration to certain contentions made by appellant and by several amici curiae on its behalf. Upon such reconsideration we are of the opinion that the decision heretofore rendered properly disposes of the issues raised on this appeal. We therefore adopt as part of the opinion of this court the following portions of the opinion heretofore rendered:

“This is an action to quiet title. Plaintiffs, husband and wife, reside in Los Angeles. The property involved therein is located in San Francisco. In February, 1929,…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Harris v. San Diego Flume Co.California Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Hicks v. WilsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
  3. Keele v. ClouserCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
  4. Gold v. PhelanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
  5. Wiley B. Allen Co. v. WoodCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1916

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by144 opinions

  1. Bertero v. National General Corp.California Supreme Court · 1974
  2. Hobart v. Hobart Estate Co.California Supreme Court · 1945
  3. Boren v. State Personnel BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
  4. Panopulos v. MaderisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  5. Cable Connection, Inc. v. DirecTV, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2008

139 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API