Heilig v. Parlin
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtVan Dyke, J.
January 2, 1891, the appellant, Heilig, and respondent, Parlin, entered into an agreement, in writing, for the sale, by Parlin to Heilig, of a certain twenty acres of land in Kings County, then belonging to Parlin. Heilig was required by the agreement to take possession of the land and to make certain payments, and at his own expense set out to vines or fruit trees one fourth of said land each year for four successive years, and keep the same in good growing and thrifty condition. Thereupon the vendee, Heilig, entered into possession of said land and performed the conditions and paid all the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Glock v. Howard & Wilson Colony Co.California Supreme Court · 1898
- Shively v. Semi-Tropic Land & Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1893
- Merrill v. MerrillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
3Cited by12 opinions
- Keidatz v. AlbanyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
- Lemle v. BarryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
- Winter v. KittoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
- Sawyer v. Sterling Realty Co.California Court of Appeal · 1940
- Burmester v. HornCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1917
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.