Schmidt v. Mesmer
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County and from an order denying a new trial. Walter Van Dyke, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcFarland, J.
This action was brought to recover damages for an alleged false and fraudulent represénta*268tion made by the defendant to the plaintiffs with respect to a certain lease executed between the parties. The jury found a verdict for the defendant, and judgment was entered accordingly. Plaintiffs appeal from the judgment and from an order denying a motion for a new trial.
On December 30, 1893, the defendant was the owner of certain real property in Los Angeles, described generally as the United States Hotel. On that day the parties executed a written instrument, by which the defendant leased said…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Nounnan v. Sutter County Land Co.California Supreme Court · 1889
- Doherty v. BellIndiana Supreme Court · 1876
3Cited by86 opinions
- Bagdasarian v. GragnonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
- The Edward Barron Estate Co. v. the Woodruff Co.California Supreme Court · 1912
- Tuttle v. StovallSupreme Court of Georgia · 1910
- Austin v. Hallmark Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1943
- Kingman & Co. v. StoddardCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1898
81 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.