Legal Opinion

Boulevard Land Co. v. King

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 4, 1932No. Docket No. 7389PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

TAPPAAN, J., pro tem.

Plaintiff Boulevard Land Company instituted an action to recover certain payments alleged to be due it under the terms of a contract for the sale of real property. The contract provided for payment in monthly installments. During the trial a supplemental complaint was filed which prayed for judgment for the entire balance remaining unpaid of the purchase price stipulated in this contract. Defendant King filed an answer to the complaint and a cross-complaint alleging fraud on the part of plaintiff and praying judgment for damages for moneys paid and loss of profits. The…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Rosemead Co. v. Shipley Co.California Supreme Court · 1929
  2. Zeller v. MilliganCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
  3. Noll v. BaidaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  4. Holiday v. TolosanoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1918
  5. Wiberg v. BarnumCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. MacIsaac v. PozzoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
  2. J. Bryant Kasey and Maryann Kasey v. Molybdenum Corporation of America, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1964
  3. Cobbs v. CobbsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  4. Wilson v. Rigali & VeselichCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
  5. Graham v. Los Angeles First National Trust & Savings BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935

3 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