Legal Opinion

Kraemer v. Coward

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 30, 1934No. Civ. 9195PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JOHNSTON, J., pro tem.

An action was brought in the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of Alameda wherein E. F. Kraemer was plaintiff and Joseph Coward, Elizabeth Coward, his wife, and Mrs. L. M. Moore were defendants, the purpose of said action being to recover possession of certain premises in Oakland under the provisions of section 1161a of the Code of Civil Procedure. Judgment was had by the plaintiff, from which judgment defendants have appealed.

The facts, briefly stated, are as follows: Defendants Joseph Coward and his wife, Elizabeth Coward, were desirous of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Haines v. Commercial Mortgage Co.California Supreme Court · 1927
  2. Sharp v. Mortgage Security Corp. of AmericaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  3. Navajo County Bank v. DolsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
  4. Orloff v. PeceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Michigan National Bank v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
  2. French v. Mortgage Guarantee Co.California Supreme Court · 1940
  3. Ury v. Jewelers Acceptance Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1964
  4. Freeze v. SalotCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
  5. Morello v. Growers Grape Products Assn.California Court of Appeal · 1947

4 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