Legal Opinion

Pico v. Cohn

California Supreme Court

Decided March 13, 1889No. 12590PublishedCited by 27 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of 'Los Angeles County, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtWorks, J.

— This is an action by the plaintiff and appellant to compel the reconveyance of certain real property conveyed by.him to the defendant, on the grounds: 1. That the same was conveyed as security for money borrowed; and 2. That the conveyance was procured by fraud.

Preliminary to a discussion of the merits of the case, we are called upon to determine whether the matters presented by the statement on motion for a new trial can be considered. The respondent contends that the statement must be disregarded for the reason that no *385notice of intention to move for a new trial is set out therein or in…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Calderwood v. BrooksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
  2. Dominguez v. MascottiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
  3. Girdner v. BeswickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
  4. Wright v. SnowballCalifornia Supreme Court · 1873
  5. Bernal v. O'HanlonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Pico v. CohnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Schneider v. Market Street Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1901
  3. Scott v. WoodCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  4. Monterey County v. CushingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  5. Kahn v. WilsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898

22 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