Legal Opinion

Gentry v. Citron

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 18, 1918No. Civ. No. 2304PublishedCited by 2 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

WORKS, J., pro tem.

This is an action for unlawful detainer, in which the defendants appeal from a- judgment against them.

The defendants together occupied the premises which are the subject of the action, under a written lease executed by the plaintiff. Before the commencement of the action the plaintiff served upon one of the lessees the three days’ notice to quit which is^ provided for in subdivision 2, section 1161, Code of Civil Procedure, the notice having been addressed to both lessees. The statute mentioned requires service of the notice upon “the tenant,” and the appellants contend…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Spencer v. BarnesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1914

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. University of Southern California v. WeissCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
  2. Tatum v. TownsendDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1948

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API