Legal Opinion

Holman v. Toten

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 3, 1942No. Civ. 13463PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SHAW, J., pro tem.

The defendant appeals from a judgment declaring plaintiff to be the owner of a described parcel of land and quieting plaintiff’s title thereto against all claims of defendant.

The points made by defendant on this appeal require a consideration of the evidence for their determination. Such consideration is much limited by the form of the record on appeal. The evidence is presented by a bill of exceptions which contains only certain documentary evidence introduced by the respective parties. The bill, after stating the plaintiff’s documentary evidence, declares that over…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Estate of ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
  2. Moore v. SchneiderCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
  3. Cannon v. HandleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
  4. Whitney v. HigginsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
  5. Lee v. SilvaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Hagge v. DrewCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Todd v. VestermarkCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
  3. United States v. Certain Parcels of Land SituateDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1949
  4. Johnson v. CasperIdaho Supreme Court · 1954
  5. Vierneisel v. Rhode Island Insurance Co.California Court of Appeal · 1946

14 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