Legal Opinion
Sormano v. Wood
California Supreme Court
Decided October 2, 1918No. L. A. No. 4616PublishedCited by 7 opinions
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMelvin, J.
Plaintiff was successful in an action to- quiet title to certain real property in the county of Los Angeles. One of the defendants, J. H. Smith, has appealed, bringing here the judgment-roll alone.
The complaint is in the usual form and contains the allegation that plaintiff “is now and for many years last past has been the owner and in the possession of that certain real property,” which is described in detail. Luther B. Wood and J. H. Smith (now appellant) answered, denying plaintiff’s ownership in the property or any part thereof and setting up their alleged "ownership in fee to all of it.…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Larkin v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- Miller v. LucoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Bulwer Consolidated Mining Co. v. Standard Consolidated Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1890
- Brooks v. WhiteCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1913
- Hanson v. GoldsmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
3Cited by7 opinions
- Kramer v. SanguinettiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
- Thornton v. StevensonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- Furnivall v. GrovesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
- Bay Land & Terminal Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
- Bay Land Terminal v. Superior Court of San MateoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.