Perine v. Teague
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcKee, J.
This was a summary proceeding brought under section 1161, C. C. P., by a landlord against his tenants, for an unlawful detainer of leased premises, after the expiration of the term for which they had been let.
*447Judgment for recovery of possession of the premises, treble rents, and costs of suit was entered ; and from the judgment and an order denying a new trial, the defendants appeal.
The point which they make on the appeal is, that the judgment is erroneous, because (1) they were tenants at will, in possession under a written lease, void for uncertainty in the description of the premises, and…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Michalitschke Bros. & Co. v. WellsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Earl Orchard Co. v. FavaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
- Kuhn v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Lincoln National Life Insurance v. SampsonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1931
- Craig v. GrayCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1905
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.