Legal Opinion

Fanning v. Green

California Supreme Court

Decided September 20, 1909No. S.F. No. 5077PublishedCited by 81 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtAngellotti, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment in favor of plaintiff, and from an order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial in an action to quiet title.

The plaintiff and defendant’s intestate,’ Margaret Fanning, were husband and wife. They had been married many years when they purchased the lot of land in San Francisco, an undivided one half of which is in controversy here. They had accumulated some property, the proceeds of the savings from the salary of plaintiff as a police officer, and the profits of a grocery store maintained by him which Margaret attended to in his absence. A part of this…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Alferitz v. ArrivillagaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  2. Kyle v. CraigCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  3. Nilson v. SarmentCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
  4. Hamilton v. HubbardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
  5. Croley v. California Pacific R.R. Co.California Supreme Court · 1901

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

3Cited by81 opinions

  1. Huber v. HuberCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
  2. Scott v. BurkeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
  3. Hansen v. Bear Film Co.California Supreme Court · 1946
  4. Socol v. KingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
  5. Spreckels v. SpreckelsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916

76 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