Smiddy v. Grafton
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Elmer R. McDowell, E. Earl Crandall, and William Hazlett, for Appellant. H. F. Bridges, and George E. Overmeyer, for Respondents.
1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.
The defendant appeals from the judgment and from an order denying him a new trial.
The complaint states a cause of action in unlawful detainer to obtain possession of a lot in Los Angeles. The defendant answered, admitting the execution of the lease set forth in the complaint and the expiration of the term, but claiming the right to remain in possession as a purchaser, under an agreement contained in the contract of lease, whereby the plaintiffs agreed that defendant should have the right to buy the lot at any time during the term, at a price stated. The dispute concerns only the question of…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Easton v. MontgomeryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Murphy v. HusseySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1906
- Roberts & Corley v. McFadden, Weiss & KyleCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1903
- Whittier v. GormleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1906
- Grant v. BeronioCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Miller v. DyerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Mains v. City Title Insurance Co.California Supreme Court · 1949
- Dennis v. OverholtzerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- Prosser v. SchmidtSupreme Court of Colorado · 1948
- In Re Estate of BackestoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.