Legal Opinion

Wilson v. Coffey

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 1, 1928No. Docket No. 6279PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CAMPBELL, J., pro tem.

The appellant has appealed from a judgment rendered following an order granting a motion made by respondent under section 633 of the Code of Civil Procedure, whereby the original judgment was vacated and a different judgment entered. The action is for specific performance of a contract to purchase land; the appellant being the vendee and the respondent the vendor thereof. In the original judgment specific performance of the contract was denied; the respondent was denied damages, and a fund of $5,000, which had been deposited with the clerk of the court, was ordered to be…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Glock v. Howard & Wilson Colony Co.California Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Tuso v. GreenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  3. Shreeves v. PearsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  4. Cannon v. HandleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
  5. McDonald v. HuffCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Hydranautics v. FilmTec Corp.District Court, S.D. California · 2003
  2. Brown v. CoppCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
  3. Hastings v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
  4. Steel v. DuntleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
  5. Wilson v. CoffeyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931

1 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