Legal Opinion

Lieman v. Golly

California Supreme Court

Decided July 18, 1918No. L. A. No. 4498. Department OnePublishedCited by 9 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.

The appeal is from the judgment on the judgment-roll alone.

The plaintiff by his complaint sought to annul two deeds executed by his daughter, Annie M. Golly, to the defendant, at different dates, one on July 1, 1912, and the other on December 3, 1912, for the same parcel of land, and for a judgment declaring that the title to the parcel of land covered by said deeds, vested in the heirs of said Annie M. Golly, the plaintiff being one of such heirs. The grounds for the claim that the deeds are void or voidable are that Annie M. Golly at the time of the execution of said deeds was of unsound…

2Cited by9 opinions

  1. Eastman v. PiperCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
  2. Miller v. JohnstonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
  3. Pomper v. BehnkeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
  4. Huntoon v. Southern Trust & Commerce BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
  5. Knudson v. AdamsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934

4 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