Legal Opinion
Svistunoff v. Svistunoff
California Court of Appeal
Decided November 17, 1949No. Civ. 14071PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDooling, J.
This litigation is between parents as plaintiffs and their son as defendant. In 1939, the son, hereafter called Peter, was residing and domiciled in the United States of America and his parents, hereafter called Michael and Maria, were in this country temporarily, their place of domicile then being Harbin, China. While in this country in Í939, Michael and Maria acquired by deed the title to real property in San Francisco improved with an apartment house. They in turn deeded the property to Peter in the same year and returned to Harbin. Maria reentered the United States as an immigrant in…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Cooney v. GlynnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
- Bradley Co. v. BradleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
- Watson v. PooreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
- Steinberger v. SteinbergerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
- Airola v. GorhamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Marshall v. MarshallCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
- Moriarty v. CarlsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- Stone v. LobsienCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
- Phalanx Air Freight, Inc. v. National Skyway Freight Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1951
- Briggs v. NilsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.