Gardner v. Samuels
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Napa County. E. D. Ham, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHarrison, J.
The plaintiff leased from the defendant, Samuels, November 18, 1886, a tract of land in Napa county for the term of three years from May 2, 1887, and entered into possession of said land at the commencement of the term, and at its expiration, May 2, 1890, surrendered the premises to the plaintiff. The lease contained the following agreement: “ It is further mutually covenanted and agreed by and between said parties that said party of the second part may at any time, prior to the going into effect of this lease, go upon *87said premises to make such improvements as he shall deem necessary, and…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- O'Callaghan v. BodeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Bailey v. RichardsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
- Ecke v. FetzerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1886
- Cherry v. MonroNew York Court of Chancery · 1848
- Taylor v. BaldwinNew York Supreme Court · 1850
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Montecito Valley Water Co. v. City of Santa BarbaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Wuest v. WuestCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
- Madary v. City of FresnoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912
- Willcox v. KehoeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1905
- Johnsen v. American-Hawaiian S. S. Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1938
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.