Legal Opinion

Thomson v. Thomson

California Supreme Court

Decided November 18, 1936No. S. F. 15593PublishedCited by 43 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCurtis, J.

Action to quiet title to real property situated in the city and county of San Francisco. The complaint is in the usual form of actions of that type. The defendant answered and alleged that he was the owner of an undivided one-fourth of the real property of which the plaintiff claimed to be the sole owner. In addition to his answer, he filed a cross-complaint making the plaintiff a cross-defendant, and bringing in and making a party to said action, Retta Tuttle Thomson, the mother of the plaintiff and defendant, the two parties named in the original complaint being brothers. In his…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Moore v. CoppCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Curtis v. SutterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
  3. Donahue v. MeisterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  4. Angus v. CravenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
  5. Merced Mining Co. v. FremontCalifornia Supreme Court · 1857

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

3Cited by43 opinions

  1. Anderson v. WhippleIdaho Supreme Court · 1951
  2. DeGarmo v. GoldmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  3. Connell v. BowesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  4. Shopoff & Cavallo LLP v. HyonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
  5. Hoopes v. DolanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008

38 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