Legal Opinion

King v. Fragley

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 19, 1912No. Civ. No. 985PublishedCited by 4 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.

This was an action to quiet title and, as stated by appellant, the only question raised upon the trial was whether or not a certain deed executed on the second day of November, 1909, by Sarah Fragley to her husband, Martin Fragley, operated as a valid transfer and whether it was delivered or not. The trial court found that said deed was prepared by an attorney employed by the grantee, “and on November 2, 1909, at the said home of Fragley and his wife, and in the presence of John C. Quinlan, Charles A. King, one of the executors named in the will, and Hamilton Bauer, a notary public and…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Bury v. YoungCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  2. Moore v. TrottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
  3. Kenney v. ParksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Stone v. DailyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
  2. Longley v. BrooksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  3. Coward v. De CrayCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1918
  4. F. P. McKay Co. v. Savery House Hotel Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1918

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

Powered by the Exa API