Legal Opinion
Letteau v. Ellis
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 15, 1932No. Docket No. 8277PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PARKER, J., pro tem.
This action was to have a forfeiture declared after breach of condition. The case may be better understood from a general summary of the facts.
About the year 1905 Lulu N. Letteau was the owner of real property in the city of Los Angeles, which she subdivided into three blocks of sixty lots each and placed upon the market under the name of “The Entwistle Tract”. In the deeds by which the great majority of the lots were sold the following clause appears: “ . . . said lot shall never at any time be sold rented to or occupied by any person of Negro descent; and that a…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hurd v. AlbertCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
- Koehler v. RowlandSupreme Court of Missouri · 1918
- Hess v. Country Club ParkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
- Downs v. KroegerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
- Wayt v. PateeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Fairchild v. RainesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Walton v. City of Red BluffCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
- Dooley v. Savannah Bank Trust CompanySupreme Court of Georgia · 1945
- Trautman v. HokrCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
- Forman v. HancockCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.