Sherman Bros. v. Potter
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Solano County. S. K. Dougherty, Judge, entering order for costs nunc pro tunc. Emmett Seawell, Judge, refusing to vacate order nunc pro tunc. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
HENSHAW, J.—
A petition was filed by the appellants in the matter of the estate of the deceased, seeking specific performance of a contract for the sale and conveyance of land made by deceased with them. The proceedings were under section 1597 and 1598 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The administrator made answer, controverting the alleged right to compel the conveyance, and concluded by a prayer that the petitioners take nothing by their petition. After hearing, the court dismissed the petition without prejudice, as contemplated by section 1602 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The decree was…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Cowdery v. London Etc. BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- Morrison v. DapmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1853
- Stuttmeister v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Estate of CorwinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
- Leonis v. LeffingwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
3Cited by17 opinions
- Bowman v. BowmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
- Taber v. BaileyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1913
- McKannay v. McKannayCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
- Phipps v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
- Kowalsky v. NicholsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1913
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.