Legal Opinion

O'Banion v. Paradiso

California Supreme Court

Decided July 16, 1964No. S. F. No. 21400PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMcCOMB, J.

Defendants Paradiso appeal from a judgment in favor of plaintiff in an action to compel specific performance of a contract for the sale of real property and to quiet title thereto.

Facts: On February 23, 1961, defendant Salvador H. Orduno signed a written memorandum offering to sell to plaintiff all of his “rights & title” to certain real property for $2,000, with a 60-day period of acceptance.

Plaintiff immediately accepted the proposal and offered to pay the $2,000 at that time, but Orduno stated he did not need the money then and requested that it be put in escrow together with the money…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Ellis v. MihelisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
  2. The Wood Estate Co. v. ChanslorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
  3. California Savings & Commercial Bank v. WheelerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  4. Glazer v. HansonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
  5. Mitchell v. LocurtoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Coombs v. OuzounianUtah Supreme Court · 1970
  2. Curran v. HastreiterAlaska Supreme Court · 1978
  3. Dufresne v. Elite Insurance Co.California Court of Appeal · 1972
  4. Holmgren Brothers, Inc. v. BallardUtah Supreme Court · 1975
  5. Kimm v. AndrewsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1974

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