Legal Opinion

Batini v. Ivancich

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 28, 1930No. Docket No. 3846PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PARKER, J., pro tem.

This action involves the ownership and right to possession of certain real estate situated in this state.

Plaintiff rests his claim upon a sheriff’s deed. Defendants contend that the deed is void and of no effect. Both sides here agree that the sole question presented both in the court below and here is on the validity of said sheriff’s deed. The trial court held that the deed was effective to transfer title and entered its decree in favor of plaintiff and the defendants appeal. At the outset, it may be noted that no claim of irregularity is made as to any proceeding up to…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Frink v. RoeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
  2. Sargent v. ShumakerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  3. Smith v. RandallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1856
  4. Bechtel v. WierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
  5. Williams v. ReedCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Standley v. KnappCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
  2. Crenshaw v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
  3. Hamilton v. CarpenterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  4. Taliaferro v. TaliaferroCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
  5. Adams v. Pratt, District JudgeUtah Supreme Court · 1935

1 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