Legal Opinion

Abbot Kinney Co. v. City of Los Angeles

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 20, 1963No. Civ. 27200PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBurke, P. J.

Plaintiffs brought this action to quiet title to certain beach property fronting on the Pacific Ocean in the Santa Monica Bay area, contending that conditions contained in the deed through which the City of Los Angeles (City) acquired title had been violated by the City, resulting in a reversion of the property to the plaintiffs as successors of the original grantors. Upon a trial of the action by the court sitting without a jury, judgment was rendered in favor of the City, from which judgment plaintiffs appeal.

The original grantors of the property were land developers who owned most of the…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Bernstein v. PittsburghSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  2. Johnston v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
  3. Wattson v. EldridgeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
  4. Hanna v. Sunrise RecreationSupreme Court of Florida · 1957
  5. Liebrand v. OttoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Faus v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
  2. McGarry v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 1973
  3. Anderson v. Time Warner Telecom of California, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2005
  4. BEACHCROFT PROPERTIES v. City of AlabasterSupreme Court of Alabama · 2006
  5. Cleveland Botanical Garden v. Worthington DrewienOhio Supreme Court · 2022

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

Powered by the Exa API