Legal Opinion

Nelson v. Schoettgen

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 15, 1934No. Civ. 5067PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HELD, J., pro tem.

The plaintiffs herein, on July 20, 1932, entered into an agreement with defendant, whereby defendant leased to plaintiffs five certain quartz claims in the county of Tuolumne. The lease also contained an option to purchase the properties for the sum of $62,500, of which sum $14,400 was to be paid in ninety-six consecutive monthly installments of $150 each, beginning on the first day of July, 1932. The remaining $48,100 was to be paid in eight annual installments in varying amounts, beginning on January 10, 1934.

Two clauses in this agreement are the basis of the present…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Quatman v. McCrayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
  2. Murphy v. SheftelCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  3. McNeece v. WoodCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  4. Booth v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  5. Mazuran v. StefanichCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Universal Sales Corp. v. California Press Manufacturing Co.California Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Smith v. ZeppMontana Supreme Court · 1977
  3. Beaumont v. FaubusSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1965
  4. Ser-Bye Corp. v. C. P. & G. Markets, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1947
  5. Wagner v. ShaponaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954

5 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