Legal Opinion

Armstrong v. Sacramento Valley Realty Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 28, 1921No. Civ. No. 2227PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PREWETT, P. J., pro tem.

This is an appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff and respondent and against the appellants in an action brought ^gainst them to enforce the terms of a contract dated on April 27, 1917. Though the record in the case is somewhat voluminous, the actual matters in dispute may he brought down to a very narrow compass.

On December 6, 1910, the respondent and other persons owned 1,251 shares of the capital stock of ArmstrongQuatman Co., a corporation, and the appellant Mrs. Quatman owned the remaining 1,249 shares. On said day said corporation entered into a…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Parsons v. AmbosSupreme Court of Georgia · 1904
  2. Armstrong v. Sacramento Valley R. Co.California Supreme Court · 1919
  3. Town of Bristol v. Bristol & Warren Water WorksSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1896
  4. Grosvenor v. FlintSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1897
  5. Magee v. MageeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Lifton v. HarshmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
  2. Miller v. DyerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  3. Wilk v. VencillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
  4. San Francisco Design Center Associates v. Portman CompaniesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
  5. Wheat v. ThomasCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930

6 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