Davis v. Schweikert
California Supreme Court
The main facts are stated in the opinion. The first, second, and third instructions given for the plaintiff were as follows: "1. Fraud is any cunning deception or artifice used to circumvent, cheat, or deceive another.
Read the full summary
The main facts are stated in the opinion. The first, second, and third instructions given for the plaintiff were as follows: "1. Fraud is any cunning deception or artifice used to circumvent, cheat, or deceive another. If you therefore find, from the evidence, that the defendants agreed and conspired together to deprive the plaintiff of his lease, and, in pursuit of said agreement and conspiracy and to carry out the same, the defendant A. Schweikert made to the defendant M. E. Schweikert, his wife, a voluntary, simulated, and sham deed of said leased premises, and made with the deceitful and…
1Opinion of the Court
COOPER, C.
Action to recover twelve hundred dollars damages. The case was tried before a jury and a verdict returned for plaintiff in the sum of four hundred dollars. This appeal is from the judgment and an order denying defendants* motion for a new trial. The facts concerning which there is . no controversy are substantially as follows:
The defendants are and were at all times named in the pleadings husband and wife. On the twenty-eighth day of October, 1895, the defendant Albert Schweikert executed and delivered to plaintiff a written lease of the premises described in the complaint for the…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Gabriel v. BorowyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1949
- Worcester Felt Pad Corporation v. Tucson Airport AuthorityCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1956
- Pefkaros v. HarmanCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1934
- Ogle v. HubbelCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1905
- Helton v. StewartCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.