Legal Opinion

Short v. Short

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 4, 1930No. Docket No. 7163PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSturtevant, J.

The plaintiff commenced an action to recover under two separate contracts. The defendant answered and a trial was had before the court sitting without a jury. That court made findings in favor of the plaintiff and from the judgment entered thereon the defendant has appealed.

Formerly the plaintiff and defendant were husband and wife. They had a child, a son, who was about ten years of age when this case was tried. During their married life the parties accumulated some community property. In January, 1927, they entered into an agreement which the parties termed the first agreement. By its terms…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Union Collection Co. v. BuckmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
  2. In Re Estate of BellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
  3. Lynch v. Superior Court of S.F.California Supreme Court · 1906
  4. Slaker v. McCormick-saeltzer Co.California Supreme Court · 1918
  5. Borland v. BorlandCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Pacific Mutual Life Insurance v. McConnellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Godfrey v. GodfreyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
  3. Deyl v. DeylCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
  4. Heathman v. VantCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  5. Ettlinger v. EttlingerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941

2 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