Legal Opinion

Jones v. Jones

California Supreme Court

Decided October 12, 1903No. L.A. No. 1295PublishedCited by 21 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.

This was an action to have declared void two deeds for a tract of land, one executed by the plaintiff to the defendant Jones, and another executed by the defendant Jones to the defendant Simpson, and for a decree that the plaintiff is the owner in fee of the property, and that neither Jones nor Simpson has any interest therein. The appeal is from the judgment-roll, and from an order denying the defendants’ motion for a judgment in their,favor on the findings. The following facts alleged in the complaint are found to be true, to wit: That the plaintiff and the defendant Jones were at all the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Brison v. BrisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  2. Feeney v. HowardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  3. Kittle v. BellegardeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  4. Alaniz v. CasenaveCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  5. Hayne v. HermannCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Cooney v. GlynnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Lauricella v. LauricellaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
  3. Bradley Co. v. BradleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
  4. Steinberger v. SteinbergerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
  5. Rosemead Co. v. Shipley Co.California Supreme Court · 1929

16 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