Legal Opinion

Houghton v. Steele

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1881No. 6,655PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Appeal from an order denying a new trial in the Twelfth District Court, City and County of San Francisco. Wheeler, J. The defendant had judgment and moved for a new trial, which was denied, and he appealed.

1Opinion of the Court

ROSS, J.:

One Donner being, on the 10th of April, 1858, the owner in fee of a certain lot of land in the City and County of San Francisco, conveyed to one John Yontz by deed an undivided third of it—the deed reciting: “ The foregoing conveyance is upon the following condition, to wit, That the said John Yontz, party of the second party, hereby covenants and agrees to proceed to recover the possession of the above-described lot at his own expense, at a suit at law, provided, however, if a compromise is made by the said Yontz, with parties now in possession of said lot, or other parties holding…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Marshall v. CraigCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1809
  2. People ex rel. Downer v. NortonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. City of Hollister v. Monterey InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
  2. Antonelle v. Kennedy & Shaw Lumber Co.California Supreme Court · 1903
  3. Griffith v. HappersbergerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  4. Eucalyptus Growers Ass'n v. Orange County Nursery & Land Co.California Supreme Court · 1917
  5. Hobbs v. DavisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914

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

Powered by the Exa API