Thompson v. Pacific Electric Ry. Co.
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtPreston, J.
This is an appeal by plaintiffs from a judgment of nonsuit entered after both sides had concluded the introduction of their evidence. The single issue presented is the plea of the statute of limitations, subdivision 2 of section 338 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Eespondents’ statement of the facts and of the question involved is accurate and as follows:
“September 22, 1917—Eloise Wright Porter was granted a life estate in the property in question, with the reversion in plaintiffs’ predecessors.
“November 4, 1919—-Eloise Wright Porter deeded parcel 1 to the defendant. This deed made no mention…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Newport v. HattonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- Akley v. BassettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
- Westcott v. MeekerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1909
- Pryor v. WinterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
- Bartlow v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy RailroadIllinois Supreme Court · 1909
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Faus v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
- Rhoda v. County of AlamedaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933
- Triplett v. WilliamsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
- Dieterich International Truck Sales, Inc. v. J. S. & J. Services, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1992
- Estate of BryanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.