Legal Opinion

Bailard v. Marden

California Supreme Court

Decided February 9, 1951No. L. A. 21120PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, J.

Willis R. Bailard and his wife conveyed real property to Muriel Harden. The deed declared that the grant was made subject to all conditions and restrictions of record. By the mistake or inadvertence of the Bailards and their agents, the restrictions of record did not limit the use of the lot to residential purposes. When this situation became known to the Bailards, they sued for reformation of their deed and other relief. The appeal is from the judgment in favor of the Bailards.

In their third amended complaint a mutual mistake by the contracting parties was pleaded for a first cause of…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Holmes v. AndersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Hess v. Ford Motor Co.California Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Lemoge Electric v. County of San MateoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  3. Appalachian Insurance v. McDonnell Douglas Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1989
  4. Heart River Partners v. GoetzfriedNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2005
  5. McNeil v. AttawayArizona Supreme Court · 1960

29 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