Doak v. Bruson
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.
On January 21, 1905, the plaintiff obtained a decree that all the equitable rights of the defendant and of the intervener, under a certain contract, in certain lands, were thereby foreclosed and declared null and void, but further providing that the defendant, or the intervener, might at any time within one hundred and twenty days thereafter pay to the plaintiff or his attorney the sum of $11,711.64, with interest at eight per centum per annum from January 21, 1902, to the date of such payment, and that if payment was so made within the time so specified, the said plaintiff should execute to…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Ladd & Tilton v. MasonOregon Supreme Court · 1882
- McCourt v. JohnsOregon Supreme Court · 1898
- Potts v. PlaistedMichigan Supreme Court · 1874
- Holladay v. HolladayOregon Supreme Court · 1886
- Hyams v. BambergerUtah Supreme Court · 1894
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by88 opinions
- Reynolds v. FraysherCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
- Gray v. RobinsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
- Fuller v. LindenbaumCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
- Bonelli v. ChandlerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
- Gordon v. PerkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
83 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.