Wagner v. Eustathiw
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. . M. T. Brittan, J. E. Ebert, and E. T. Manwell, for Appellant.
1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.
This is an action for the specific performance of a contract for the conveyance of land. Judg ment passed for defendant and plaintiff appeals. The uncontradicted evidence shows that plaintiff and defendant were friends and neighbors and had been such for many years. They owned adjoining lots of land on Third Street in the city of Marysville. Upon these lots buildings had been erected, the plaintiff using his building as a saloon, the defendant using his as a restaurant. There was an opening in the dividing wall which allowed access to and from the saloon and restaurant. In 1908 they agreed to…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Ehrenstrom v. PhillipsCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1910
3Cited by6 opinions
- King v. StanleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
- Muller v. CooperSupreme Court of Georgia · 1928
- O'Donnell v. LutterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
- Janssen v. DavisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
- Gero v. RicheyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1918
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.