Legal Opinion

Bird v. Potter

California Supreme Court

Decided February 15, 1905No. L.A. No. 1591PublishedCited by 18 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

COOPER, C.

This action was brought to enforce specific performance of a written contract for the sale of real estate. The court filed findings upon which judgment was entered for plaintiff. Defendant made a motion for a new trial, which was denied, and now prosecutes this appeal from the order denying his motion. He claims that the evidence is insufficient to justify the judgment and decision, and that certain errors of law occurred during the trial to his prejudice.

The contract upon which the action depends is as follows:—

“Los Angeles, Cal., May 16, 1902.
“Received of Samuel M. Bird five…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. People v. McLeanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
  2. People v. CebullaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
  3. Nason v. LingleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  4. Hay v. MasonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Greenstone v. Claretian Theological SeminaryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  2. Gray v. WalkerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
  3. Cisco v. Van LewCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
  4. Harper v. GoldschmidtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
  5. Fawkes v. ReynoldsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922

13 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