Legal Opinion

Pacific States Savings & Loan Co. v. Perez

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 2, 1942No. Civ. 11820PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

McWILLIAMS, J. pro tem.

Defendants have appealed from a judgment rendered in favor of plaintiff. The notice of appeal also attacks the order of the lower court denying their motion for a new trial. The latter order is not appeal-able and therefore the appeal therefrom must be dismissed. (See Code Civ. Proc., sec. 963.)

Plaintiff sued to quiet title to certain real property of which it claimed ownership. Defendants filed an answer denying plaintiff’s ownership of the property. They also filed a cross-complaint in which they alleged that plaintiff claimed to have acquired title to the property by…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Chapman v. JocelynCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  2. Reiniger v. HassellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  3. Campbell v. ShaferCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
  4. Hinds v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  5. Reed v. LyonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Gschwend v. StollCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
  2. Miller v. BoswellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
  3. Schulman v. ShoresCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
  4. Franke v. ClausCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
  5. R. H. Geoffroy & Co. v. FariaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API