Legal Opinion

Bradbury v. Thomas

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 24, 1933No. Docket No. 1071PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJennings, J.

Plaintiffs instituted this action for the purpose of quieting their title to fifteen specific lots de scribed in the complaint. The defendant Harriet F. Thomas answered the complaint, admitting that she claimed an interest in the property described in the complaint which was adverse to any claim of plaintiffs. She likewise filed a cross-complaint wherein it was alleged that she was the owner and holder of two promissory notes executed by H. B. Adsit and wife and of the mortgage executed to secure payment of said notes; that subsequent to the execution of the notes and mortgage Adsit conveyed…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. California Trust Co. v. CohnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Burns v. HiattCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
  3. Hanes v. CoffeeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
  4. Braun v. CrewCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  5. Martin v. HallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Electric Co. v. Town of DanversMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1991
  2. MASSACHUSETTS MUNICIPAL WHOLESALE ELECTRIC v. DanversMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1991
  3. Eldridge v. BurnsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
  4. Block v. Ford Motor Credit CompanyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1972
  5. Hafford v. SmithMissouri Court of Appeals · 1963

7 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