Legal Opinion

Tench v. McMeekan

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 23, 1911No. Civ. No. 877PublishedCited by 16 opinions

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Alameda County, and from an order denying a new trial. William H. Waste, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. William H. H. Hart, and Aylett R. Cotton, for Appellant.

1Opinion of the CourtHall, J.

This action was brought to obtain a decree that the defendant held certain described real estate in trust for plaintiff and for a conveyance thereof. Plaintiff recovered judgment as prayed for, and defendant moved for a new trial, which motion was denied. In due time defendant appealed from the judgment and order to the supreme court. The appeals were subsequently, by order of the supreme court, transferred to this court for determination.

Respondent claims the premises in suit under a conveyance from John Tench, now deceased, to herself, while appellant claims the said premises under a…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Brison v. BrisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  2. Nordholt v. NordholtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Smith v. LombardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  2. Steinberger v. SteinbergerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
  3. Jarkieh v. BadagliaccoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
  4. Snyder v. City Bond & Finance Co.California Court of Appeal · 1930
  5. Holiday v. TolosanoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1918

11 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