Legal Opinion

Daniels v. Harney

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 28, 1952No. Civ. 14931PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNourse, P. J.

Plaintiff sued to quiet title to certain moneys in the possession of a special administrator. A second cause of action for money had and received is not involved in the appeal. A judgment on the pleadings was entered in favor of the plaintiff on the first cause of action.

The appellant argues that the judgment on the pleadings was error because disputed issues of fact were raised in the answer. The disputed issues were issues of law only. The answer admitted that respondent and her husband held three bank accounts in joint tenancy; that, on October 13, 1948, Shull Daniels withdrew all said…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Ephraim v. Metropolitan Trust Co.California Supreme Court · 1946
  2. Fish v. Security-First National BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  3. Wallace v. RileyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
  4. Wallace v. RileyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
  5. Bliss v. MartinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Feltz v. PavlikMissouri Court of Appeals · 1953
  2. Crowell v. MilliganNebraska Supreme Court · 1953
  3. Daniels v. BaldwinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
  4. Estate of DanielsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
  5. Baldwin v. HarneyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953

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