Legal Opinion

Hunter v. McKenzie

California Supreme Court

Decided September 28, 1925No. Docket No. L.A. 8061PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLennon, J.

This is an action for damages for deceit. It arises out of an agreement for the exchange of real properties. Briefly stated, the facts pleaded in plaintiff’s complaint are these: In June, 1920, at Detroit, Michigan, the plaintiff, Lewis C. Hunter, and his wife, Alma J. Hunter, who has since died, entered into a written contract with the defendants, William E. McKenzie, and his wife, Minnie B. McKenzie, for the exchange of several parcels of real property owned by the Hunters, situated in the city of Detroit, for a one-half interest in improved real property, situated in the city of Los…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Hines v. BrodeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
  2. Taylor v. . GuestNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
  3. Holton v. NobleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  4. Barbour v. FlickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  5. Carey v. GuillowMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870

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

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Vasquez v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  2. Mirkin v. WassermanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
  3. Agnew v. ParksCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  4. Sangster v. PaetkauCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
  5. Bohn v. WatsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954

22 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