Legal Opinion

Hendrickson v. California Talc Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 9, 1942No. Civ. 2983PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBarnard, P. J.

This is an action to determine the interests of various parties in certain mining claims and to quiet their title thereto. On a former appeal, on the judgment roll alone, the judgment was reversed because of inconsistent findings and the cause was remanded for a new trial with respect to the ownership of Co-operation No. 1 mining claim. (Hendrickson v. California Talc Co., 35 Cal.App.2d 544 [96 P.2d 175].)

Thereafter the plaintiff and the cross-complainant filed amended pleadings each seeking to have it established that he was the owner of an undivided l/6th interest in that part of the land…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Belk v. MeagherSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
  2. Wilbur v. United States Ex Rel. KrushnicSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
  3. Munson v. FishburnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  4. Capron v. Van HornCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  5. Speed v. McCarthySupreme Court of the United States · 1901

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Rickel v. Schwinn Bicycle Co.California Court of Appeal · 1983
  2. Franco Western Oil Co. v. FarissCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
  3. Webster v. KnopUtah Supreme Court · 1957
  4. Aaron v. PuccinelliCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
  5. Air Purification, Inc. v. CarleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950

2 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