Legal Opinion
Benson v. Hamilton
California Court of Appeal
Decided September 27, 1932No. Docket No. 8528PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
THOMPSON (GEORGE H.), J., pro tem.
In October, 1928, the plaintiff Martin Benson and the defendant F. J. White, each being then the owners of certain interests in real property, orally negotiated on certain terms (questions as to whether these terms embraced certain promises on the part of F. J. White and if such promises were made whether they were made without any intention of performing them have given rise to this action) an exchange of their properties. The properties were encumbered, the encumbrances taking different forms. As the result of such oral negotiation, deeds and transfers were…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Millar v. MillarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- Lawrence v. GayettyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Matteson v. WagonerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
- Rolland v. PorterfieldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- Newman v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Union FM v. Southern Cal. FMCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
- Callahan v. Chatsworth Park, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1962
- Berkey v. HalmCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
- Church of the Merciful Saviour v. Volunteers of America, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1960
- Building Permit Consultants, Inc. v. MazurCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.