Legal Opinion
Krug v. Meeham
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 15, 1952No. Civ. 18248PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtValles, J.
Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment of dismissal in a suit to set aside conveyances of realty. Defendant’s demurrer to the second amended complaint was sustained with leave to amend. Plaintiff declined to amend within the time allowed, hence the judgment.
The second amended complaint alleges:
1. Plaintiff is special administrator of the estate of James Cleary who died November 15, 1948, at the age of 78, leaving as his only heirs a son and a daughter.
2. March 11, 1948, Cleary purchased Parcel 1, and April 20, 1948, purchased Parcel 2; both parcels are in Los Angeles County. Title to both…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Murphy v. CrowleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- Fish v. Security-First National BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
- In Re Estate of BixlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- Callahan v. BroderickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Ohm v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Harman v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
- Odorizzi v. Bloomfield School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
- Rosenfeld, Meyer & Susman v. CohenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
- Berkley v. DowdsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
- Logan v. Southern California Rapid Transit DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.