Legal Opinion

Moniz v. Peterman

California Supreme Court

Decided March 30, 1934No. Docket No. Sac. 4618PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCurtis, J.

Action to quiet title to a 40-acre tract of land in Glenn County, upon which a pumping plant and well are situated. In 1908, the plaintiff Moniz and one Pimental, predecessor in interest of defendant Peterman, and one Fulton, as partners in a dairy business in Glenn County, purchased a tract of land consisting of 130' acres from David Hughes, situated in the north half of section 3, township 19 north, range 3 west, M. D. B. & M. It was agreed between the parties that Fulton should take the east 50 acres, Moniz the plaintiff, should take 40 acres adjoining Fulton’s on the west, and Pimental…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Price v. De ReyesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Clapp v. ChurchillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
  3. Staniford v. TromblyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
  4. Silva v. AzevedoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
  5. Nusbickel v. Stevens Ranch Co.California Supreme Court · 1921

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Hannah v. PogueCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  2. Mello v. WeaverCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
  3. Martin v. LopesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
  4. Roberts v. BraeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
  5. Park v. PowersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935

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