Legal Opinion
Katz v. Haskell
California Court of Appeal
Decided October 6, 1961No. Docket Nos. 25294, 25295PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLillie, J.
The present matters, in which separate judgments were rendered below, have been consolidated on appeal pursuant to stipulation of all parties; they arose, generally speaking, out of a series of transactions involving the same property, a 20-unit apartment building in the city of Burbank. Appellants Rockwell and respondents Katz and Haskell will be referred to hereinafter in the singular as Rockwell and Katz and Haskell respectively.
In each matter the background facts, all apparently without dispute, are briefly as follows: Prior to December 27, 1956, Rockwell was the owner of the real…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Bloom v. BenderCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
- Hatch v. Security-First National BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Buffalo Arms, Inc. v. Remler Co.California Court of Appeal · 1960
- Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n v. CasadyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
- Lowe v. CopelandCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Santa Anita Consol., Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1968
- Wiener v. Van WinkleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
- River Bank America v. DillerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
- Lange v. AverCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
- Bauman v. CastleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.