Pringle v. Wilson
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Pringle & Pringle, Henry E. Monroe, and William S. Andrews, for Appellant.
1Opinion of the CourtSloss, J.
This is an appeal by plaintiff from a judgment entered against him upon an order sustaining defendant’s demurrer to his complaint.
The facts, as averred by plaintiff, were these: On March 23, 1905, the defendant was the owner of a lot in the city of San Francisco located on the southerly line of Post Street and running through to the northerly line of Union Square Avenue. The lot was covered by two separate brick buildings, one of which faced on Post Street and the other on Union Square Avenue. On the day named said defendant, Wilson, by a written lease, demised and let the said premises to…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- In re the Estate of PearsonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Stuart v. HamiltonIllinois Supreme Court · 1872
- Oakley v. SchoonmakerNew York Supreme Court · 1836
- Silva v. CampbellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Marshall v. RuggWyoming Supreme Court · 1896
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Caminetti v. Pac. Mut. Life Ins. Co. of Cal.California Supreme Court · 1943
- Careaga v. CareagaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
- Miller Cattle Co. v. MatticeArizona Supreme Court · 1931
- Samuels v. SingerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
- Caswell v. GardnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.