Legal Opinion

Raisin Investment Co. v. Magginetti

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 8, 1952No. Civ. No. 18545PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HANSON, J. pro tem.

The principal question presented for determination upon this appeal from a final judgment of partition, no appeal having been taken from the interlocutory judgment, is whether a trial court can amend its interlocutory judgment which ordered a partition in kind to one for a sale thereof if it appears from the facts recited in the referees’ report that a division in kind cannot be achieved without great prejudice to the owners.

Not only do the respondent owners contend that there is no such power vested in the court, but they also contend that if the court has such power no…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Quirk v. RooneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
  2. Dunn v. DunnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
  3. Pista v. ResetarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  4. Williams v. Wells Fargo Bank & Union Trust Co.California Supreme Court · 1941
  5. Richardson v. LoupeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Riley v. TurpinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1960
  2. Koster v. WarrenDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1959
  3. Coastline JX Holdings LLC v. BennettCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2022
  4. Starcevic v. Pentech Financial Services, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2021

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API