Legal Opinion

Hall v. Hickey

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 13, 1957No. Civ. 22322PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtShinn, P. J.

The present action is for rescission by a purchaser of a contract for the purchase of a residential property.

Judgment was for defendants, denying rescission, and awarding defendants restoration of possession, damages, and other sums upon their cross-complaint. Plaintiff appeals.

The amended complaint contains three causes of action. The first alleges that James B. Hickey made certain representations to plaintiff Hall which were untrue, but which were believed by Hall to be true and which induced him to enter into the contract. These alleged representations were (1) that Hickey owned the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Ortega v. CorderoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Riverside Water Co. v. GageCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Hanson v. FoxCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
  4. Imperial Valley Land Co. v. Globe Grain & Milling Co.California Supreme Court · 1921
  5. Backman v. ParkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Collins v. Marvel Land Co.California Court of Appeal · 1970
  2. Argonaut Insurance v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
  3. Neves v. WrightUtah Supreme Court · 1981
  4. Baker v. City of Palo AltoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
  5. Casualty Insurance v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964

2 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