Legal Opinion

Hotaling v. Hotaling

California Supreme Court

Decided March 13, 1924No. S. F. No. 10217PublishedCited by 79 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMyers, J.

Plaintiffs, as stockholders and as directors, respectively, of the defendant corporation, The Hotaling Estate Company, brought this action in behalf of said corporation to establish the title of said corporation to certain premises in Marin County, known as the Sleepy Hollow Ranch. Findings and judgment in the court below were in favor of the plaintiffs and the defendants have appealed. An adequate discussion of the respective contentions of the parties requires a somewhat extended statement of facts. In the preparation of the following statement and in reviewing the evidence for that purpose…

2Cases cited43 opinions

  1. Williams v. KiddCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
  2. See v. North American Accident InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
  3. Bury v. YoungCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  4. Wheelwright v. WheelwrightMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1807
  5. Cox v. SchnerrCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916

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

3Cited by79 opinions

  1. Huth v. KatzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
  2. Buckhantz v. R. G. Hamilton & Co.California Court of Appeal · 1945
  3. Burt v. Irvine Co.California Court of Appeal · 1965
  4. Estate of PieperCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
  5. Lejeune v. General Petroleum Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1932

74 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