Legal Opinion

Johnson v. Solomons

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 2, 1932No. Docket No. 8177PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.

The plaintiff in the above action sought a decree, declaring the rights of the parties under a contract for the exchange of real property. The property, conveyed to defendants Solomons, was improved by the erection thereon of two apartment houses. Said defendants filed a cross-complaint, alleging fraud by plaintiff inducing the exchange and asking for a rescission. The other parties to the action are the lessee of the two apartment houses, and certain pel-sons who placed the furnishings therein at the instance of the tenant, for which payment was not made in full. This furniture was…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Title Ins. Trust Co. v. Calif. Etc. Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Connell v. HigginsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
  3. Murphy v. SheftelCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  4. Smith v. QuestaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
  5. Pedlar v. StroudCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Lyon v. GossCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Bakewell v. BakewellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  3. Peninsula Properties Co. v. County of Santa CruzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
  4. Bessinger v. GrotzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  5. Western Gulf Oil Co. v. Title Insurance & Trust Co.California Court of Appeal · 1946

1 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