Legal Opinion
Laist v. Nichols
California Court of Appeal
Decided June 11, 1934No. Civ. No. 1104PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HAINES, J., pro tem.
This action was brought by the appellant Theodore F. Laist to quiet, against the respondents W. IP. Nichols and Geneva Nichols, husband and wife, title to the property known as lots 2 and 15 of The Highlands in -San Diego County, as delineated on a map filed with the recorder thereof. The lots are located within what were the boundaries of the Linda Vista Irrigation District, which was dissolved by court decree in 1914. Appellant’s claim to the property is derived from a conveyance under date November 9, 1901, from Otto Laist, who is shown by the record to have then owned…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Estate of Moore v. MooreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Doolittle v. McConnellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
- Miller & Lux Inc. v. SecaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- Corning Town Co. v. DavisSupreme Court of Iowa · 1876
- Placer County v. DickersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Gammill v. MannNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1937
- Skidmore v. DambacherCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
- Jordan v. SchrieberCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
- Krienke v. StateCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
- Peterson v. StateCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.