Cashman v. Root
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Temple, C.
This action is brought to compel a conveyance to plaintiff of certain real estate, which it is averred was conveyed by plaintiff to defendant Root on the 18th of June, 1884, in trust, to secure the payment *378by plaintiff to defendant Hooker of any indebtedness which might exist within six months after the 14th of July, 1885.
The complaint alleges that plaintiff was not, at the commencement of the suit, and for a long time prior had not been, indebted to Hooker in any amount whatever.
Demand for a deed, and refusal, are also averred.
The answers admit that the conveyance was made in trust…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Irwin v. WilliarSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Markham v. . JaudonNew York Court of Appeals · 1869
- Ingraham v. TaylorSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1889
3Cited by20 opinions
- Pollitz v. WickershamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- Hicks v. Bd. of Supervisors of Orange Cty.California Court of Appeal · 1977
- Willcox v. EdwardsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Aspegren Co., Inc. v. Sherman, Swan Co.California Supreme Court · 1926
- Proposition 103 Enforcement Project v. QuackenbushCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.