Legal Opinion

Parmelee v. Brainard

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 4, 1944No. Civ. 14002PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDesmond, P. J.

This is an appeal by defendant from a judgment rendered in a suit for partition in which the court decreed that Dora C. Parmelee and Maurice W. Brainard are tenants in common of two parcels of real estate in Hollywood and appointed a referee to sell the property at public auction, the proceeds after payment of the referee’s fees and expenses to be distributed to the parties “in the proportion their respective interests, as herein set forth, bear to the money ■ received from the sale.” The “interests, as herein set forth” are fixed at the sum of $3,115.19 for Dora 0. Parmelee and $3,193.75 for…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Perelli-Minetti v. LawsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  2. McNab v. MillsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
  3. Wernse v. DorseyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Bumb v. BennettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
  2. Larson v. ThoresenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
  3. Romagnolo v. RomagnoloCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
  4. Ahr v. AhrCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957

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

Powered by the Exa API