Legal Opinion

Tannahill v. Greening

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 30, 1927No. Docket No. 4601PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PEAIRS, J., pro tem.

Plaintiff alleges that he was induced to make deeds, with grantee’s name in blank, to properties described in this action and that the deeds were placed in escrow with one Mollie L. Ramey; that the name of Mollie L. Ramey was later written in as grantee and then erased and the name of F. S. Greening written instead, all without his authority or consent. The defendants admit the filling in of grantee’s name in the deeds, but allege that both plaintiff and his wife were present and consented to the insertion of the name of F. S. Greening as grantee. Bill of exceptions does…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Upton v. ArcherCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
  2. Jones v. CoulterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
  3. Mills v. BradyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
  4. Harris v. BarlowCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
  5. Strange v. StrangeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1913

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Trout v. TaylorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
  2. Roberts v. LebrainCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
  3. Berte v. LuseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  4. De Brito v. San Diego Packing Co.California Court of Appeal · 1932
  5. McCallum v. MaxwellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933

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

Powered by the Exa API