Roland v. Hubenka
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
COUGHLIN, J.
Plaintiffs appeal from a judgment in favor of defendants in an action for damages for fraud arising out of the sale of real property. Plaintiffs Roland, husband and wife, were purchasers; defendants Hubenka, husband and wife, were sellers; defendant Smith was a real estate broker whom the court found was an agent of Hubenka; and defendant Boyd was a salesman employed by Smith.
The action was premised upon alleged false representations by defendants respecting the size and boundaries of the property. Initially defendants sought rescission and damages, but at the trial waived…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- People v. WatsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
- Dillard v. McKnightCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
- Brewer v. SimpsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1960
- Tammen v. County of San DiegoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
- Gonsalves v. HodgsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Hilliard v. A. H. Robins Co.California Court of Appeal · 1983
- Service Employees International Union v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990
- Rockley Manor v. StrimbeckWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1989
- Ralph Andrews Productions, Inc. v. Paramount Pictures Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1990
- Jue v. SmiserCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.