Legal Opinion
Lowenthal v. Kunz
California Court of Appeal
Decided May 15, 1951No. Civ. 17856PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HANSON, J. pro tem.
The question here presented is whether a joint tenancy deed executed by the record title holder to herself and another, as grantees, is invalid and ineffective merely because the title holder had originally acquired an undivided one-half interest in the property from her cograntee, without consideration, upon an oral agreement to hold said interest for her in trust. The answer to the question depends upon the interpretation to be given to Civil Code, section 683. As a prelude to its consideration we state the facts.
The defendant Adele Kunz and plaintiff’s intestate Pauline…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Beatty v. . Guggenheim Exploration Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1919
- Deadman v. YantisIllinois Supreme Court · 1907
- Edmonds v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1937
- Nicolds v. StorchCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
- Carter v. HopkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Reagh v. KelleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
- Lillard v. WalshCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Riley v. TurpinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
- Canal-Randolph Anaheim, Inc. v. JE WILKOSKICalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980
- Gonzales v. GonzalesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.