Mondran v. Goux
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, First Judicial District, County of Santa Barbara. The court gave judgment that the defendants held the legal title to an undivided one-half of the land in trust for the plaintiff, and that they convey the same to him. The defendants appealed. The other facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court:
The cause of action alleged in the complaint is that the plaintiff placed a sum of money in the hands of Chateauneuf in his lifetime, to be invested for account of the plaintiff in real estate, and that Chateauneuf added to it an equal amount of his own money, and invested the whole in the land in controversy, taking the deed in his own name. It was claimed that by reason of this transaction there was a resulting trust in favor of the plaintiff to the extent of an undivided half of the land, and the prayer is that the plaintiff be adjudged to be the owner of the undivided half,…
2Cited by21 opinions
- Kirk v. CulleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
- Clark v. RedlichCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
- Griffin Dewatering Corp. v. Northern Ins. Co. of New YorkCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
- Elmore v. ElmoreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Nichols v. RandallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.