Hannan v. McNickle
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
The Court.
Ejectment; judgment for plaintiff for possession of the premises and seventy dollars, rents and profits; defendant appeals.
It is conceded that the plaintiff was the owner on August 29, 1883. On that day he gave to the defendant - a contract, in the following words: ■—■
“ San Francisco, August 29,1883, John Hannan, party of the first part, sold to James McNickle, party of the second part, lots 10, 11, 12, 23, 24, 25, in block 160, outside land, in the Hannan tract, for the sum of nine hundred -($900) dollars, United States gold coin, to be paid in monthly installments, defer payments…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Hansbrough v. PeckSupreme Court of the United States · 1867
- Hicks v. LovellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
- Buell v. IrwinMichigan Supreme Court · 1871
- Williston v. PerkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1876
- Whittier v. StegeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Garvey v. LashellsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- Gervaise v. BrookinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- Haile v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Rhorer v. BilaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Mayer v. WestCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.