Legal Opinion

Wagner v. Trout

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 29, 1954No. Civ. 8325PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtVan Dyke, P. J.

By this action appellant Wagner sought to recover the possession of an automobile from respondent Trout. The pleadings were in the usual form and both appellant Wagner, as plaintiff below, and respondent Trout, as defendant below, asked that title to the vehicle in question be quieted. The trial court gave judgment in favor of respondent Trout and Wagner appeals.

The following facts appear in the testimony of respondent. Prior to the time that Wagner’s claim of title originated respondent was living with one Raymond Trout. The couple were not husband and wife. She purchased the automobile with…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Davis v. JudsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Blanc v. ConnorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
  3. Byrnes v. HatchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  4. Ramirez v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.California Court of Appeal · 1938

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Brownell Realty, Inc v. KellyMichigan Court of Appeals · 1981
  2. Sackin v. KerstingCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1969
  3. Sobel Building Development Partners v. Broach (In re Sexton)District Court, N.D. California · 1994
  4. Airborne America, Inc. v. Kenway CompositesDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2021

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

Powered by the Exa API