Legal Opinion

Loftis v. Marshall

California Supreme Court

Decided October 26, 1901No. S.F. No. 1830PublishedCited by 11 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

SMITH, C.

—This suit was brought against the defendant Mary E. Marshall, as administratrix of Samuel J. Marshall, deceased, to quiet the plaintiff’s title to the land described in the complaint, against an instrument purporting to be a deed from the plaintiff to Mary Loftis, his wife (the grantor of the deceased), and against the claims of the defendants generally. The other defendants are Margaret Marshall, the only child of the deceased, a minor, and Mary E. Marshall, in her personal capacity. The plaintiff had judgment, from which the defendants appeal. The facts of the case, as alleged in…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hartshorn v. DaySupreme Court of the United States · 1857
  2. Valentine v. MahoneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
  3. McCreery v. EverdingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
  4. Russell v. MallonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. J. Bryant Kasey and Maryann Kasey v. Molybdenum Corporation of America, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1964
  2. Hickman v. Southwest Dairy Suppliers, Inc.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1975
  3. Hardin v. HardinCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1927
  4. Rahr v. WittmannWisconsin Supreme Court · 1911
  5. Harris & Cole Bros. v. Columbia Water & Light Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1904

6 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