Legal Opinion

Wagner v. Ulrich

California Supreme Court

Decided June 27, 1928No. Docket No. L.A. 9118PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtShenk, J.

The action in which this appeal is prosecuted was instituted for the purpose of quieting title in the plaintiff to the real property described in the complaint.

The plaintiff purchased the property at a constable’s sale held in December, 1922, pursuant to execution issued in January, 1922, to satisfy a judgment theretofore and in December, 1921, rendered against the defendant Harry F. Ulrich. The action in which said judgment was rendered was commenced in the justice’s court of Los Angeles township on November 5, 1921. On November 25, 1921, the defendants Ulrich filed a declaration of…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Gregg v. BostwickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
  2. Maloney v. HeferCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  3. Mann v. RogersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
  4. Laughlin v. WrightCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
  5. Tiernan v. His CreditorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Montgomery v. BullockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
  2. Phelps v. LoopCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
  3. Montgomery v. BullockCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
  4. In re: Maria Teresa Melendez ReyUnited States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 2024
  5. Maria Teresa Melendez ReyUnited States Bankruptcy Court, C.D. California · 2023

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

Powered by the Exa API