Legal Opinion

Wall v. Mines

California Supreme Court

Decided September 17, 1900No. S.F. No. 2315PublishedCited by 13 opinions

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco denying a new trial. Wm. B. Daingerfield, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

CHIPMAN, C.

Action to specifically enforce an agreement to compromise and settle an action pending in the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco. The pleadings are exceedingly voluminous; the findings are many, covering every conceivable phase of a somewhat complex and anomalous case, and were in favor of plaintiff, as was the decree. The case is here on four separate appeals, to wit, an appeal by defendant, and an appeal by the intervenor from the judgment; and separate appeals by the defendant and intervenor from the order denying a motion for new trial. The transcript of the…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Smith v. WhittierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  2. Banta v. SillerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  3. Oroville & Va. R.R. v. Supervisors of Plumas Cty.California Supreme Court · 1869
  4. Preston v. HillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875
  5. Richardson v. ButlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Vallejo & Northern R.R. v. Reed Orchard Co.California Supreme Court · 1915
  2. Pueblo v. Mattei TorresSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1988
  3. State Bank v. SchultzeMontana Supreme Court · 1922
  4. Redsted v. WeissCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
  5. Marc Bellaire, Inc. v. FleischmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960

8 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