Legal Opinion

McMahon v. Grimes

California Supreme Court

Decided February 23, 1929No. Docket No. Sac. 4115PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCurtis, J.

The defendant, The San Francisco Bank, was at the times mentioned herein the owner of a tract of land situated near Marysville in the county of Tuba. The tract had been subdivided into lots under the name of the Hailwood tract, and a plat made thereof and recorded in the office of the county recorder of said county. The defendant, Lucinda R. Grimes, with her husband, resides upon a portion of said tract, and the latter was caring for said land for the owner thereof. Both the defendant Grimes and her husband were farmers and were perfectly familiar with said tract and had lived in its vicinity…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. French v. FreemanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
  2. Davis v. ButlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
  3. Teague v. HallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  4. Stevenson v. BoydCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
  5. Chapman v. Bank of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Hobart v. Hobart Estate Co.California Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Austin v. Hallmark Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Jones v. Fenton Ford, Inc.District Court, D. Connecticut · 1977
  4. Clar v. Board of Trade of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
  5. Gammon v. Ealey & ThompsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929

17 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