Legal Opinion

Pacific Palisades Assn. v. Menninger

California Supreme Court

Decided October 23, 1933No. Docket Nos. L.A. 12666 and 12771PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.

Plaintiff brought this action for the purpose of securing a judgment compelling defendant to pay the taxes on six lots located in a 'subdivision known as Pacific Palisades near Los Angeles, or, in the alternative, if defendant failed to pay the taxes, for a judgment foreclosing defendant’s rights in the lots and quieting plaintiff’s title thereto. The complaint is in six counts, each differing from the others only as to the lot described. Plaintiff alleges that in March, 1923, plaintiff agreed to sell to defendant, and defendant agreed to buy from plaintiff, renewable ninety-nine…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Goyhinech v. GoyhinechCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Bryant v. KellyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  3. Edw. L. Soule Co. v. SevertsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
  4. Goyhinech v. GoyhinechCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  5. Interstate Lumber Co. v. Loop Building Co.California Court of Appeal · 1929

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. West v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
  2. Zhadan v. Downtown Los Angeles Motor Distributors, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1979
  3. Blume v. MacGregorCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
  4. Simpson v. GillisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
  5. Sharick v. GallowayCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936

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

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

Powered by the Exa API