Salisbury v. Shirley
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco. Action for breach of covenant in a lease. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtThornton, J.
The complaint did state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against defendant.
The liability of the defendant arose out of the breach of the covenants of a lease executed by Mary Ann Frances Salisbury for herself, and as trustee and guardian of plaintiff, Joseph Hicks, and by Jotham Salisbury, to one William Shields, and by Shields assigned to the defendant. The term of the lease was for ten years and six months, commencing on the 1st day of March, 1859, and ending on the 1st day of September, 1869. The breach assigned was for non-payment of taxes by the defendant, assessed during…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- People v. San Francisco Sav. UnionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
- Post v. . KearneyNew York Court of Appeals · 1849
- City & County of San Francisco v. PhelanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
3Cited by20 opinions
- Realty & Rebuilding Co. v. ReaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- People v. JermanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
- Price v. De ReyesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- Helm v. WilsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Hughes v. WheelerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.