Legal Opinion

Conley v. Hawley

California Supreme Court

Decided November 28, 1934No. L. A. No. 13642PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCurtis, J.

This action was instituted to quiet title of plaintiff to a certain lot of land situated in the city of Inglewood. The plaintiff prevailed and the defendant has appealed from the judgment in plaintiff’s favor.

Plaintiff claims under a city treasurer’s deed executed in pursuance of street improvement proceedings instituted under the improvement act of March 18, 1885. (Stats. "1885, p. 147, and acts amendatory thereof and supplemental thereto.) This act is better known as the Vrooman Act. Defendant claims under a city treasurer’s deed, executed in pursuance of like proceedings instituted under…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. City St. Improvement Co. v. Regents of Univ. of Cal.California Supreme Court · 1908
  2. La Mesa Lemon Grove & Spring Valley Irrigation District v. HornbeckCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  3. Johnson v. TaylorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
  4. Teralta Land & Water Co. v. ShafferCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
  5. Woodill & Hulse Electric Co. v. YoungCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Monheit v. CignaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
  2. Smith v. AddiegoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  3. City of Saratoga v. HuffCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
  4. Cullinan v. GreyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  5. Thompson v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936

13 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