Legal Opinion
Burch v. Hibernia Bank
California Court of Appeal
Decided November 30, 1956No. Civ. 21497PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
VALLÉE, J.
Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment of dis missal entered after an order sustaining defendants’ demurrers to his complaint as amended without leave to amend. The action is for restoration of a leasehold, and for damages for alleged fraud arising out of an oil lease acquired by plaintiff in 1934 covering Cuyama Bancho in San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara counties.
The complaint as amended alleges:
In 1930 Edward and Balph Cebrian were the owners of Cuyama Rancho, to be referred to as Cuyama. On August 23, 1930, they executed to I. E. Martin an oil and gas lease covering 3,100 acres.…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Jorgensen v. JorgensenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
- Burtnett v. KingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
- Westphal v. WestphalCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- In re Estate of GriffithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Willson v. Security-First National BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Cedars-Sinai Medical Center v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
- Edwards v. Centex Real Estate Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1997
- Heathman v. VantCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Preston v. Wyoming Pacific Oil Co.California Court of Appeal · 1961
- Wyoming Pacific Oil Co. v. PrestonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.