Legal Opinion
Williams v. Marshall
California Supreme Court
Decided June 29, 1951No. L. A. 21141PublishedCited by 45 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, J.
Roy and Marguerite Williams were awarded a money judgment in an action based upon asserted false representations made in connection with the purchase of real property from Prank D. and Grace Edna Marshall. The court also ordered that the contract of sale and note and a deed of trust be canceled. Upon the appeal from the judgment, the findings and judgment are attacked as having no evidentiary support.
The Marshalls owned and operated a 90-acre ranch in Hemet. Some of the land was planted to citrus fruits, walnuts and apricots; the balance was unimproved. The trees ivere irrigated with water…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Bancroft v. WoodwardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- Wienke v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
- Hunt v. L. M. Field, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1927
- Reiniger v. HassellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
- Wood v. Jotham Bixby Co.California Court of Appeal · 1938
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by45 opinions
- Wallis v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
- Millbrae Assn. for Residential Survival v. City of MillbraeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
- Walters v. MarlerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
- Bohn v. WatsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- Sheldon F. Sackett, and Kvan, Inc., a Washington Corporation v. J. Frank Beaman, and Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1968
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.