Legal Opinion

Roberts v. Brae

California Supreme Court

Decided February 20, 1936No. Sac. 4930PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWaste, C. J.

In this action to quiet title the plaintiff appeals from a judgment granting such relief to the defendants in conformity with the allegations and prayer of their respective cross-complaints.

Plaintiff claims to be the record owner of lots 4 and 5 in block 9 of the town site of Diamond Springs, El Dorado County. The defendants are adjoining owners, being, respectively, the record owners of lots 3 and 6. In other words, the defendant Scheiber owns a lot that adjoins plaintiff’s lot 4, and the defendant Brae owns a lot adjoining plaintiff’s lot 5. This action is the result of a dispute over the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Clapp v. ChurchillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
  2. Muchenberger v. City of Santa MonicaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
  3. Staniford v. TromblyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
  4. Moniz v. PetermanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
  5. Vowinckel v. N. Clark & SonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933

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

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Nichols v. MitchellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  2. Hannah v. PogueCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Brown v. MillinerUtah Supreme Court · 1951
  4. Mello v. WeaverCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
  5. Hartzell v. MyallCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953

27 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