Tillaux v. Tillaux
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. J. V. Coffey, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcFarland, J.
A demurrer to the complaint was sustained and judgment rendered for defendant, and from the judgment plaintiff appeals.
On the fifteenth day of April, 1890, the plaintiff executed and delivered to defendant a deed conveying to her a certain described lot or parcel of land. It was duly acknowledged by plaintiff, and was, on said April 15th, duly recorded in the proper county. Upon its face the deed was an absolute conveyance to defendant of the title in fee to said land, without any reservation, condition, or limitation. It declared no trust and limited no use to any person other than the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Brison v. BrisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Brison v. BrisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Herwick v. LangfordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Burkett v. BurkettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Jackson v. ClevelandMichigan Supreme Court · 1866
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by55 opinions
- Sheehan v. SullivanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Bacon v. SouleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912
- Bell v. PleasantCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Alferitz v. ArrivillagaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Stiles v. CainCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.