Legal Opinion

Britton v. Hammell

California Supreme Court

Decided December 6, 1935No. L. A. 14562PublishedCited by 38 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLangdon, J.

This is a second appeal in the same cause. In the first, a judgment for defendant was reversed. (Britton v. Bryson, 216 Cal. 362 [14 Pac. (2d) 502].) Upon a retrial of the case, judgment went for plaintiff, and defendant appealed.

John H. Britton procured a decree of divorce from Sophie Britton in Bent County, Colorado, March 30, 1891. He acquired property in 1916. In 1923 and 1924 he conveyed title to said property to Rose E. Britton, supposedly his wife. She later conveyed it to him as his separate property. Rose E. Britton died in 1926, and John H. Britton then made deeds of gift to…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Trimble v. TrimbleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
  2. Lahaney v. LahaneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
  3. Britton v. BrysonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  4. Quagelli v. QuagelliCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. Benson v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
  2. Hammell v. BrittonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Perkins v. Benguet Consolidated Mining Co.California Court of Appeal · 1942
  4. Droeger v. Friedman, Sloan & RossCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
  5. Falk v. FalkCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941

33 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