Legal Opinion
Conley v. Fate
California Court of Appeal
Decided May 25, 1964No. Civ. 27658PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRoth, J.
Appellants (sellers) appeal from a judgment in favor of the respondents (purchasers) ordering specific performance of an alleged contract to convey two unimproved lots in the city of Lawndale.
The uncontradicted facts show that an alert real estate broker, Friestad, persuaded appellants to sign a “deposit receipt” which, among other things, provided: “Received from Art Conley . . . herein called the ‘Buyer’ the sum of $500 as a deposit on account of the purchase price of the following described property. ...” The purchase price was $10,000 payable as follows: “Cash: two thousand five hundred…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Gould v. CallanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- Roven v. MillerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Colorado Corp., Ltd. v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
- Ridgway v. ChaseCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- Callisch v. FarnhamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Middlebrook-Anderson Co. v. Southwest Savings & Loan Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971
- S. Jon Kreedman v. MEYERS BROS. PARKING-WESTERNCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
- Hutton v. GliksbergCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982
- Western Homes, Inc. v. Herbert Ketell, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1965
- Roskamp Manley Associates, Inc. v. Davin Development & Investment Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1986
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.