Legal Opinion

Williams v. Hebbard

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 17, 1939No. Civ. 6127PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ALLEN, J., pro tem.

This action arose out of certain deeds of conveyance made to the respective parties by a common grantor. One Armistead owned lot 37 situate in sections 4, 8, 9 and 17, township 18 north, range 8 east, M. D. B. & M., in Yuba County. On November 10, 1932, Armistead deeded to plaintiff the northern portion of said lot 37 by the following description: “A strip of land commencing on the west boundary of the Great Eastern Mine, at a point where the right bank of Willow Creek crosses the eastern boundary of said Nevada Mining Company’s Placer Mine and extending along said right…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Castro v. BarryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Pennie v. HildrethCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  3. Chapman v. HicksCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
  4. Reiniger v. HassellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  5. Whitney v. ShermanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. General Development Corporation v. KirkDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1971
  2. Cokins v. FrandsenNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1966
  3. Manuel v. KiserCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
  4. Cokins v. FrandsenNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1966

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

Powered by the Exa API