Legal Opinion

Harvey v. Griffiths

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 26, 1933No. Docket No. 4886PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtThompson, J.

The plaintiffs have appealed from a judgment which was rendered against them pursuant to an order sustaining without leave to amend, a demurrer to the second amended complaint. The complaint contains three causes of action, each of which is based upon fraud alleged to have been exercised incident to the procuring of an exchange of properties. The first two counts charge fraud in securing the execution of the instruments of conveyance and the complaint prays for rescission of the docu ments together with damages. The third cause alleges fraud in the foreclosure of a trust deed which was…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Pico v. CohnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Consolidated Reservoir & Power Co. v. ScarboroughCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  3. Haddad v. McDowellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
  4. Hanley v. HanleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  5. Hendricks v. HendricksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Hammell v. BrittonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Williams v. WilliamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
  3. Palma v. PowersDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1969
  4. Horton v. HortonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  5. Powell v. LaneSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2008

15 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