Legal Opinion

Sheehan v. All Persons, Etc.

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 22, 1926No. Docket No. 5545PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PRESTON, P. J., pro tem.

Plaintiff James C. Sheehan brought this action under the provisions of the McEnemey Act to quiet title to a lot of land situated at the northwest corner of Broderick and Greenwich Sreets, in the city and county of San Francisco. Defendant Fidelity Bond and Mortgage Company answered, alleging that it was the owner in fee simple of an undivided- one-half interest in said property, and praying that its title thereto be quieted. The case was tried by the court and judgment was entered quieting the title to an undivided one-half interest in the plaintiff James C. Sheehan…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Clarke v. ClarkeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
  2. Murray v. MurrayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  3. Hibberd v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
  4. Canadian & American Mortgage & Trust Co. v. Clarita Land & Investment Co.California Supreme Court · 1903
  5. Christerson v. FrenchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Roth v. NashWashington Supreme Court · 1943
  2. Standley v. KnappCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
  3. Wilkerson v. ThomasCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
  4. Wood v. DavidsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
  5. Yuba River Sand Co. v. City of MarysvilleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947

11 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