Legal Opinion
Bacciocco v. Curtis
California Supreme Court
Decided September 1, 1938No. Sac. 5094PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
On this rehearing, we adopt that part of our former decision setting forth the facts and issues, as follows:
“This is an action to set aside as fraudulent a conveyance from defendant husband to defendant wife and to subject the property to plaintiffs’ judgments. The trial court denied any relief to the plaintiffs and awarded to the defendant W. H. Curtis judgment in the sum of $6,400 on the fourth cause of action pleaded in his cross-complaint. The plaintiffs have appealed from the entire judgment.
“In February, 1923, Reuben Kern leased to A. G. Steel-man property in San Francisco to…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Green v. FrahmCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- Bandle v. Commercial Bank of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
- A-1 Garage v. Lange Investment Co.California Court of Appeal · 1935
- Redmon v. GrahamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
- Security Trust Co. v. SilvermanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Dearborn Stove Co. v. CaplesTexas Supreme Court · 1951
- Enos v. Picacho Gold Mining Co.California Court of Appeal · 1943
- Thompson v. SwirynCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
- Kuhlemeier v. LackCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
- Brooks v. CoppedgeIdaho Supreme Court · 1951
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.