Southern Pacific Railroad v. Painter
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, and from an order denying a new trial. Lucikn Shaw, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHarrison, J.
The plaintiff entered into two several contracts with the defendant’s intestate August 18,1887, for the sale to the latter of two designated sections of land in the county of Los Angeles. The land described in the* agreements was claimed by the plaintiff as a portion of a grant to it by the United States by virtue of the act of March 3, 1871. At the date of the agreements no patent had been issued therefor, and each of the agreements contained the following covenant:
“In case it be finally determined that patent shall not issue to said party of the first part for all or any of the tracts…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Popcorn Equipment Co. v. PageCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
- Stratford Irrigation District v. Empire Water Co.California Court of Appeal · 1941
- Peter v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
- San Jose Land & Water Co. v. San Jose Ranch Co.California Supreme Court · 1900
- Huntington v. DonovanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.