Legal Opinion

Richardson v. Butler

California Supreme Court

Decided December 23, 1889No. 12454PublishedCited by 27 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtMcFarland, J.

Action to quiet title. Judgment for

plaintiffs, from which and from an order denying a new trial, the defendants Kate Dunne and Alice Dunne appeal.'

Plaintiffs claim title to the disputed premises as heirs at law of their deceased father, John Sproul. Defendants claim title under a probate sale made to their grantors in the course of the administration of the estate of said Sproul, deceased, upon the petition of his administratrix, Mary Ann Sproul. The court below ruled said sale to be void; and, practically, the only question in the case is, whether or not that ruling was correct.

The court…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Pryor v. DowneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875
  2. Stuart v. AllenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
  3. Fitch v. MillerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1862

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Lamont v. VingerMontana Supreme Court · 1921
  2. Burris v. AdamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  3. Zilmer v. GerichtenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  4. Wood v. RoachCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  5. Warner Bros. v. FreudCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901

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