Legal Opinion

Leland v. Craddock

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 23, 1947No. Civ. 15872PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BARTLETT, J. pro tem.

Plaintiffs brought an action to have a contract declared terminated and no longer of any force and effect. The defendant Catherine L. Craddock filed a cross-complaint seeking specific performance of the same agreement. From a judgment in favor of plaintiffs, the defendant Craddock appeals.

The plaintiffs were owners in common of real estate in Pasadena. On May 8, 1945, they agreed to convey the prop erty to the defendant Catherine L. Craddock. This agreement was contained in and constituted, among other things, the escrow instructions given to the defendant Escrow and Loan…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Philpott v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
  2. McCall v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
  3. Bennett v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
  4. McNeese v. McNeeseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
  5. Prewitt v. Sunnymead Orchard Co.California Supreme Court · 1922

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Ira Garson Realty Co. v. BrownCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  2. Harrison v. Connecticut Mutual Life InsuranceDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1991
  3. Petre v. RoegnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963

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

Powered by the Exa API