Legal Opinion

Holiday v. Tolosano

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 12, 1918No. Civ. No. 2589PublishedCited by 10 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

BEASLY, J., pro tem.

This is an appeal by defendants from a judgment against them in an action for the cancellation and rescission of a contract for the exchange of real property.

The single and simple question involved in the appeal is as to whether or not the findings in favor of plaintiffs are sustained by the evidence. We think this question must be answered in the affirmative.

The plaintiffs transferred certain real property to the defendants in exchange for an option to purchase certain other real property upon given terms, and in their complaint they allege, and the court found, that the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Feeney v. HowardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Dowd v. TuckerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1874
  3. Rheingans v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
  4. Maxson v. LlewelynCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  5. Tench v. McMeekanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1911

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Boyd v. BevilacquaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
  2. Tranchina v. ArcinasCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
  3. Jarkieh v. BadagliaccoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
  4. Snyder v. City Bond & Finance Co.California Court of Appeal · 1930
  5. Kendrick v. BarrowCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938

5 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