Legal Opinion

Crandall v. Parks

California Supreme Court

Decided January 31, 1908No. L.A. No. 1923PublishedCited by 31 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtAngellotti, J.

Defendant appealed from a judgment rescinding a contract for the exchange of property, and from an order denying his motion for a new trial. The appeal from the order denying a new trial has been dismissed. The appeal from the judgment was not taken within sixty days after its rendition and entry, and therefore the exceptions to the decision on the ground that it is not supported by the evidence cannot be reviewed. (Code Civ. Proc., see. 939, subd. 1.)

It is claimed that the findings are not sufficient to support the judgment. They show substantially the following facts: Plaintiff was the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. First National Bank of Los Angeles v. MaxwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  2. Dow v. SwainCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  3. Oppenheimer v. ClunieCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  4. Norris v. CrandallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. The Edward Barron Estate Co. v. the Woodruff Co.California Supreme Court · 1912
  2. Jolley v. Chase Home Finance, LLCCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
  3. Cicone v. URS Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1986
  4. Palladine v. Imperial Valley Farm Lands Assn.California Court of Appeal · 1924
  5. Herdan v. HansonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920

26 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