Legal Opinion

Jordan v. Henck

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 17, 1958No. Civ. 5775PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtShepard, J.

In 1929 defendants owned Lots 1 and 2 of Block 10 “Arrowhead Lakeview Forest.” They then sold Lot 1 to another person. After the sale of Lot 1, they purported by grant deed to convey to the State of California a “right of way and incidents thereto for said State Highway upon, over and across . . . blocks ... 10 ... as .. . designated upon that certain map entitled ‘Arrowhead Lakeview Forest’ . . . etc.”

In the year 1947, defendants regained title to said Lot 1. They still owned Lot 2, so that they then owned both Lots 1 and 2. Lot 1 Avas improved with a store building and a gasoline pump.…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Cave v. CraftsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1878
  2. Fristoe v. DrapeauCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
  3. Owsley v. HamnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
  4. Cheda v. BodkinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  5. Quinlan v. NobleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Freightways Terminal Co. v. Industrial & Commercial Construction, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 1963
  2. Hogue v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1969
  3. People v. TaylorCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
  4. Leonard v. HaydonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API