Legal Opinion

Manig v. Bachman

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 23, 1954No. Civ. 15903PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPeters, P. J.

Max E. Manig, claiming to be the owner of certain improved real property in Oakland, brought this action to quiet his title to the property, naming several defendants as claimants of an adverse interest therein. The only defendant to answer was H. Glenn Lawler. The other defendants either were not served or their defaults were taken. Lawler denied that Max Manig had any lawful claim to the property, and averred that he, Lawler, owned the property and requested that his title thereto be quieted. He pleaded the source of his title in detail. From a judgment quieting Lawler’s title Max Manig…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Riley v. MartinelliCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  2. Bell v. PleasantCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  3. Follette v. Pacific Light & Power Corp.California Supreme Court · 1922
  4. Hunter v. WatsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1859
  5. Pell v. McElroyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Natural Resources, Inc. And A. K. Wilson v. William J. WinebergCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1965
  2. Gates Rubber Co. v. UlmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1989
  3. Claremont Terrace Homeowners' Ass'n v. United StatesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
  4. Probasco v. Eads (In re Probasco)Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
  5. Evans v. FaughtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965

8 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