Legal Opinion

Andreson Co. v. Regenold

California Supreme Court

Decided August 21, 1913No. L.A. No. 3110PublishedCited by 5 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtMelvin, J.

Appeal by defendants from a judgment against them and from an order denying their motion for a new trial.

Plaintiffs sued to quiet title to certain land described in their complaint as “the northeast quarter of the northwest quarter and northwest quarter of the northeast quarter, and lots numbered six, seven and eight, all in section 18, in township one south of range 4 west, S. B. B. & M., excepting from said lands all those portions thereof that are embraced in the following described tracts of land.” Certain excepted parcels were thereafter described, being parcels which had been sold from…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Hecht v. SlaneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
  2. Meyer v. QuiggleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
  3. Cohn v. ParcelsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
  4. Clark v. KelleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
  5. Tynan v. KernsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Buehler v. BassettCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
  2. Reed v. WingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
  3. Crabbe v. WhiteCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
  4. Metropolitan Casualty Insurance v. MargulisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
  5. Mahan v. MillarCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922

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

Powered by the Exa API