Legal Opinion

Kaliterna v. Wright

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 6, 1949No. Civ. No. 14143PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBray, J.

In an action for declaratory relief, defendants appealed from a judgment in favor of plaintiff determining a lease to be in force and that an option to renew had been validly exercised.

Facts

Resolving conflicts in favor of plaintiff, the evidence shows the following:

In 1935, plaintiff noticed the property here involved, which was then unimproved real property along Bayshore Highway in Santa Clara County near Moffett Field, and investigated to determine if it was available for rental. Someone told her that the land belonged to Mr. and Mrs. Swall and that a Mr. Wright had charge of the property,…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Columbia Pictures Corp. v. DeTothCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Norton v. City of PomonaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Bewick v. MechamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
  4. Swift v. Occidental Mining & Petroleum Co.California Supreme Court · 1903
  5. Bard v. KentCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  2. Caira v. OffnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
  3. Ablett v. ClausonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
  4. Newell v. NewellIdaho Supreme Court · 1956
  5. Hayward Lumber & Investment Co. v. Construction Products Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1953

11 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