Legal Opinion
Marsh v. Lott
California Court of Appeal
Decided June 20, 1908No. Civ. No. 505PublishedCited by 24 opinions
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the ‘County of Los Angeles, and from an order denying a new trial. Chas. Monroe, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.
Action for specific performance of a contract, "whereby plaintiff asserts that in consideration of twenty-five cents he was given an option to purchase, for the sum of $100,000, certain real estate owned by defendant. Judgment was rendered for defendant. Plaintiff appeals from the judgment, and from an order denying his motion for a .new trial.
The contract, specific performance of which is sought, is as follows:
“For and in consideration of the sum of twenty-five cents to me in hand paid, I hereby give Robt. Marsh & Co. an option to purchase, at any time up to and including June 1st, 1905,…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Ide v. LeiserMontana Supreme Court · 1890
- Black v. MaddoxSupreme Court of Georgia · 1898
- Newman v. FreitasCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Guyer v. WarrenIllinois Supreme Court · 1898
- Agard v. ValenciaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Bard v. KentCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Dillingham v. DahlgrenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- Klein v. MarkarianCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- Marsh v. LottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- People v. CockrillCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.