Legal Opinion

Krug v. Warden

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 3, 1922No. Civ. No. 3891PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJames, J.

From a judgment entered in favor of the plaintiff, intervener Sinelaire has appealed.

This action was to quiet title to certain real property. Plaintiff exhibited in evidence a deed from the sheriff of Los Angeles County made pursuant to a decree foreclosing a mortgage lien against the property in question. This deed was dated the 21st of July, 1916, and recorded in the office of the county recorder on July 26th of the same year. It appeared that during all the time subsequent to the making of said deed plaintiff had- been in possession of the property described therein and claimed to have…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Moore v. CoppCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Zilmer v. GerichtenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  3. Warden v. Bittleson Law & Collection AgencyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. City of Los Angeles v. WattersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
  2. Stoneman v. FritzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
  3. Western Loan & Building Co. v. BandelIdaho Supreme Court · 1936
  4. Miller v. PriceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
  5. San Diego Improvement Co. v. BrodieCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API