Legal Opinion

Lundblade v. Boyes

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 12, 1929No. Docket No. 6734PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.

An action to recover damages for deceit in which judgment was entered for the plaintiff.

Defendants, who are husband and wife, own a ranch consisting of 320 acres of timber and farm land situated in Humboldt County. The plaintiff alleged that, induced by the oral promises of the defendants to convey to her for its reasonable value a lot approximately one-fourth of an acre in area which formed a part of the above ranch, she built a dwelling-house upon the lot; that the defendants did not intend to perform their promises when the same were made, and have since failed and refused to…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Sherman v. SandellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
  2. Waer v. WaerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
  3. Retsloff v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
  4. Liver v. MillsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
  5. Aronson & Co. v. PearsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Union FM v. Southern Cal. FMCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
  2. Berkey v. HalmCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
  3. Schmidt v. BeckelmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  4. Masten v. Fox West Coast TheatresCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
  5. Union Flower Market, Ltd. v. Southern California Flower Market, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1938

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

Powered by the Exa API