Schumacher v. Truman
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtHarrison, J.
Action to determine an adverse claim to certain real estate in the county of San Mateo.
The findings of fact herein show that on June 8, 1895, and prior thereto, the plaintiff and the defendant Ida J. Martens— then the wife of the plaintiff—were the owners in common of the land described in the complaint, and that on that day they entered into a written agreement, by which the plaintiff was to have the control and management of said land, and that upon his sale of the same, the proceeds thereof should be divided between them, and further, that in case of an action for divorce between them, the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Kirby v. TallmadgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Unger v. MooneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
- Smith v. YuleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
- Pope v. . AllenNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- Holland v. . BrownNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Robertson v. Peters (In re Weisman)Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
- Olson v. CornwellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933
- Gates Rubber Co. v. UlmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1989
- Ildvedsen v. First State Bank of BowbellsNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1912
- Sanguinetti v. RossenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1906
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.