Barbour v. Flick
California Supreme Court
APPEALS from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County and from an order denying a new trial. J. W. Hughes, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtVan Dyke, J.
—This action is based upon fraud and deceit alleged to have.been perpetrated by the defendant in effecting an exchange of his property for that of the plaintiffs.
In August, 1896, the plaintiffs were residents of, and owned property in, the city of Chicago, and the defendant, owned a ranch known as the “Edge-Hill ranch,” located near Escondido, in San Diego county.
The court below found that the false and fraudulent statements were made by the defendant, as alleged in the plaintiffs’ complaint, and that none of the representations and statements so made, either in writing or by his agent in…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Spect v. SpectCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Sherman v. SandellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Ortega v. CorderoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Riverside Water Co. v. GageCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Carey v. GuillowMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Bagdasarian v. GragnonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
- Philpott v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
- Howe v. MartinSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1909
- Colegrove Water Co. v. City of HollywoodCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- Cross v. BouckCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.