Legal Opinion

Smith v. Schrader

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 28, 1926No. Docket No. 3128PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPlummer, J.

Action to compel specific performance of a contract to convey real estate. Plaintiffs had judgment and the defendants appeal.

The transcript shows that on the nineteenth day of January, 1923, the plaintiffs and defendants, other than the Paul Kent Truck Company, entered into the following agreement, for the sale and purchase of certain lots situate in the city of Los Angeles:

“This agreement, made this 19th day of January, 1923, at the city of Los Angeles, by and between George Schrader, hereinafter called the vendor, and Lisle L. Smith and Stoughton 'Smith, hereinafter called the vendees,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. McMahan v. McMahonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1922
  2. Abbott v. the 76 Land and Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
  3. Harper v. . BattleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1920
  4. Durkee v. Chino Land and Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1907
  5. Kincaid v. DunnCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1915

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. King v. StanleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  2. Lifton v. HarshmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
  3. Greenstone v. Claretian Theological SeminaryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  4. Real Estate Analytics, LLC v. VallasCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
  5. Hutton v. GliksbergCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982

6 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