Legal Opinion

Eymann v. Wright

California Supreme Court

Decided December 31, 1917No. L. A. No. 4083PublishedCited by 3 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.

Plaintiff’s action was to recover against the defendants for violation of their contract with her, she being protected by an indemnity bond. The gravamen of the action is this: By their contract defendants made to plaintiff an executory assignment of their rights under desert land entries, agreeing to do all things necessary under such entries to perfect them and entitle defendants to patent for those lands, and on issuance of such patents the titles so granted to them were in turn to be conveyed to plaintiff. The complaint charged in several counts, but all to this effect. A general demurrer…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Sanders v. DutcherCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Wilson v. WilsonMontana Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Estate of Boggs v. BoggsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  3. Griffis v. SquireCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968

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

Powered by the Exa API