Legal Opinion
Montgomery v. De Picot
California Supreme Court
Decided May 5, 1908No. L.A. No. 1994PublishedCited by 21 opinions
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
This is an action for specific performance of a contract for the sale of real estate.
The contract which was the basis of the action related to a purchase by W.G. Bradshaw of a tract of land in Los Angeles County owned by defendants and was executed by defendants and said Bradshaw on November 25, 1904, the defendants being designated therein as the parties of the first part and Bradshaw as party of the second part.
The portions of the contract material for consideration on this appeal are as follows: "That in consideration of the payment to them by the party of the second part of the sum of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Arkansas Valley Smelting Co. v. Belden Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Boston Ice Co. v. PotterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
- Swarts v. Narragansett Electric Lighting Co.Supreme Court of Rhode Island · 1904
- Rice v. GibbsNebraska Supreme Court · 1891
- Bethlehem v. AnnisSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1860
3Cited by21 opinions
- Paige v. . FaureNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
- Dobkin v. LandsbergSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Murphy v. Schuster Springs Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1926
- Alexander v. WingettMontana Supreme Court · 1922
- Rosello v. HaydenSupreme Court of Florida · 1955
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.