Kent v. Williams
California Supreme Court
Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Fresno County granting a new trial. E. W. Risley, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcFarland, J.
Judgment was rendered for plaintiffs, but, on motion of the defendant the San Francisco Savings Union, a new trial was granted. From the order granting a new trial the plaintiffs appealed. The action was brought to foreclose what is alleged to be a mortgage executed by the defendant Williams to the plaintiffs upon certain property in Fresno county. The main facts in the case are these: On the twelfth day of April, 1888, the plaintiffs, being the owners of certain real property in Oakland, Alameda county, made a written contract with defendant Williams, by which they *540agreed to sell him said…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Avery v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Taylor v. McKinneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1862
3Cited by19 opinions
- Kent v. WilliamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
- Butler v. WilkinsonUtah Supreme Court · 1987
- Longmaid v. CoulterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- Shedoudy v. Beverly Surgical Supply Co.California Court of Appeal · 1980
- Walsh v. CoghlanIdaho Supreme Court · 1920
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.