Legal Opinion

Meisner v. McIntosh

California Supreme Court

Decided August 10, 1928No. Docket No. S.F. 12347PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.

This appeal was decided in department and thereafter a motion to hear the same in bank was granted. At the time of the granting of said motion we were in doubt as to the correctness of that portion of the department opinion which held that the judgment was valid, notwithstanding it exceeded the amount alleged in the complaint to be due from the defendants. By the complaint the plaintiff sought to recover damages for fraudulent representations made by the defendants whereby he was induced to convey certain real property of the fair market value of $1,000. There was evidence produced…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Title Ins. and Trust Co. v. IngersollCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Silvers v. GrossmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  3. Cross v. BouckCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
  4. Johnson v. PolhemusCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  5. Burke v. KochCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Crofoot v. Blair Holdings Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1953
  2. Singleton v. PerryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  3. Little v. Stuyvesant Life Ins. Co.California Court of Appeal · 1977
  4. Meyer Koulish Co. v. CannonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
  5. Godfrey v. SteinpressCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982

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