Heydenfeldt v. Osmont
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Edward E. Cothran, James G. Maguire, and R. P. Henshall, for Appellants.
1Opinion of the CourtMelvin, J.
Plaintiffs, who are appellants here, began this action in equity in which they prayed for a judgment declaring that defendants hold only the bare legal title to five parcels of real property in the city and county of San Francisco. Plaintiffs also asked for judgment that defendants have no right, title, or interest in the property, and they prayed also for general equitable relief.
The appeal is from the judgment and from an order denying the motion of plaintiffs for a new trial.
The basis of this litigation is the same fraud on the part of the predecessor of defendants which these plaintiffs…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Bacon v. SouleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912
- American National Bank v. DonnellanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
- McIntyre v. TrautnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Mulcahey v. DowCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Osmont v. All Persons, Etc.California Supreme Court · 1913
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Wells v. LloydCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Scafidi v. Western Loan & Building Co.California Court of Appeal · 1946
- Kuhn v. GottfriedCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
- Fink v. WeismanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933
- Metzger v. VestalCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.