Legal Opinion

People v. Loop

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 6, 1954No. Civ. 19950PublishedCited by 56 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VALLÉE, J.

The state brought this proceeding in eminent domain to acquire for freeway purposes the fee title to a triangular parcel of realty, referred to in the record as “parcel 5 (Amended),” owned by defendants Philip L. and Maud N. Wilson. We shall refer to the property sought to be condemned as “parcel 5.”

Defendants are the owners of a rectangular, inside, unimproved parcel of realty near downtown Los Angeles, consisting of Lot 52 on the east and Lot 53 on the west, located on the north side of Wilshire Boulevard, one of the most highly developed and principal thoroughfares leading into…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Rose v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  2. People v. RicciardiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Bacich v. Board of ControlCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  4. People v. Ocean Shore Railroad, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1948
  5. People v. La MacChiaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953

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

3Cited by56 opinions

  1. Territory of Hawaii v. AdelmeyerHawaii Supreme Court · 1961
  2. State Ex Rel. State Highway Commission v. ClevengerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1956
  3. People Ex Rel. Department of Public Works v. SilveiraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
  4. Transwestern Pipe Line Company v. YandellNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1961
  5. Sacramento & San Joaquin Drainage District Ex Rel. State Reclamation Board v. ReedCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963

51 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