Legal Opinion

Smith v. Tristam

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 1, 1933No. Docket No. 7602PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWorks, P. J.

In this action judgment went for defendant and plaintiffs appeal.

The action is one to compel specific performance of a contract for the purchase of real property. It being an action in equity, respondent contends that this court has not jurisdiction of the appeal, which was directly prosecuted to it, the Constitution requiring that appeals in equity cases be taken directly to the Supreme Court. Through inadvertence a transfer of the case was not made to the Supreme Court at the time when the transcript of the clerk of the trial court was filed with the clerk of this court. Since the briefs…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Work v. Associated Almond GrowersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
  2. O'Gorman v. WachterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Beatty v. Oakland Sheet Metal Supply Co.California Court of Appeal · 1952
  2. Holder v. Home Savings & Loan Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
  3. Ingalls v. BellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
  4. Moon v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943

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

Powered by the Exa API