Legal Opinion

Schnier v. Percival

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 31, 1927No. Docket No. 4636PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

McLUCAS, J., pro tem.

Plaintiff brought suit to recover the purchase price paid by plaintiff to H. B. Eshleman, doing business under the style and firm name of H. B. Eshleman Realty Company, for certain real property which was owned by defendants and which was being sold by Eshleman as the agent of defendants. Judgment was rendered for plaintiff, and defendants appeal therefrom.

Appellants were joint owners of certain real estate, the title being in the name of appellants J. Phil Percival and Eugene P. Fallís, as trustees for all of the owners. According to the testimony of respondent’s witness…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Geary Street, Park & Ocean Railroad v. RolphCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Ballard v. NyeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
  3. Reynolds v. CollinsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1884
  4. Hicks v. WilsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
  5. Gold v. PhelanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Ernst v. SearleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
  2. Marr v. Postal Union Life Insurance Co.California Court of Appeal · 1940
  3. Sarten v. PomattoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
  4. Hennelly v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
  5. Moore v. PhillipsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959

4 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