Legal Opinion
United Truckmen, Inc. v. Lorentz
California Court of Appeal
Decided November 3, 1952No. Civ. 15277PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBray, J.
In an action for specific performance of a contract for sale of real property, judgment went for defendants. Plaintiff appeals.
Questions Pbesbnted
1. Was the description of the real property indefinite? 2. If so, was it so indefinite as to exclude the admission of parol evidence?
Pacts
Defendant Ernest Lorentz, Sr., agreed to sell and plaintiff to buy certain real property in Santa Clara County. The agreement was in the form of a “Deposit Receipt.” The property is described as “the following described property, situate in the County of Santa Clara, California: The southerly portion of that…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Ellis v. KlaffCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
- Craig v. ZelianCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
- Marriner v. DennisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Preble v. AbrahamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Best v. WohlfordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Beverage v. Canton Placer Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1955
- Bettancourt v. Gilroy Theatre Co., Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1953
- Rivers v. BeadleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- Dennis v. OverholtzerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- McKeon v. Santa Claus of California, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1964
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.