Legal Opinion

Palm v. Smither

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 5, 1942No. Civ. 6714PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.

The defendant has appealed from a judgment which was rendered against him in a suit to cancel a lease with an option to purchase land, on the ground of fraud. The action also sought to quiet title to the land in the plaintiff.

It is contended the findings and judgment are not supported by the evidence; that the court erred in receiving oral evidence of conditions which vary the terms of the written lease, and that alleged misrepresentations on the part of the lessee, with respect to the value of the property, do not constitute a cause for rescinding the lease, in the absence of proof…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Mooney v. CyriacksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
  2. Wilson v. Rigali & VeselichCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
  3. Nunez v. MorganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  4. Stewart v. CrowleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
  5. Darrow v. HoulihanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Tahoe National Bank v. PhillipsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  2. Pao Ch'en Lee v. GREGORICUCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
  3. Kahn v. LischnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
  4. Schied v. Bodinson Manufacturing Co.California Court of Appeal · 1947
  5. Martinelli v. GabrielCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951

3 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