Wright v. Rohr
California Court of Appeal
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. J. A. Barham, R. A. Long, H. W. A. Weske, Herbert Choynski and James Raleigh Kelly for Appellants.
1Opinion of the CourtWaste, P. J.
This is nominally an action brought by plaintiffs, the appellants, to quiet title to a tract of land situated in Sonoma County. In addition to the relief usually sought in such actions, plaintiffs pray that a certain deed, set out in the complaint, be canceled. Judgment was entered in favor of the defendants, and plaintiffs appeal.
Winfield S. M. Wright, prior to his marriage to Jarena D. Wright, now deceased, was a widower with two children, the plaintiffs and appellants here, the issue of his former marriage. On December 13, 1860, said Winfield S. M, Wright and Jarena D. Wright were married,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Estate of BairdCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- Bacon v. SouleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912
- In Re Estate of HigginsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- Estate of RicksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- Nobles v. HuttonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1907
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- In Re the Estate of McArthorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
- Chambers v. O'NeillCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919