Legal Opinion

Ver Bryck v. Luby

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 7, 1945No. Civ. 14772PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMcCOMB, J.

From a judgment in favor of defendant after trial before the court without a jury in an action to cancel a deed, plaintiff appeals.

The evidence being viewed in the light most favorable to the defendant (respondent), and pursuant to the rules set forth in Estate of Isenberg, 63 Cal.App.2d 214, 216 [146 P.2d 424], the essential facts are:

On April 9, 1943, plaintiff deeded a- parcel of real property in the city of Long Beach to defendant reserving in herself a life estate. The present action was instituted for the purpose of setting aside the deed on the ground that plaintiff was not mentally…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Sharon v. Sharon, 11991 (Cal. 7-17-1889)California Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Kennedy v. IsenbergCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
  3. Mitchell v. TowneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
  4. Woodcock v. the Petrol Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1941

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. City & County of San Francisco v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
  2. Utz v. AureguyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
  3. H. F. Ahmanson & Co. v. Salomon Brothers, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1991
  4. People v. CastielCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
  5. Insurance Co. of North America v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980

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

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

Powered by the Exa API