Legal Opinion

McGinn v. Pritchard

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 14, 1916No. Civ. No. 1795PublishedCited by 1 opinion

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.

This is an appeal from a judgment in favor of the defendants J. Maud Giles and Maurice Rosenthal, sued under the fictitious names of Jane Doe and John Doe, in an action brought to foreclose a lien for street work. The above-named defendant J. Maud Giles was the owner of the property to be affected by this lien on the sixth day of December, 1911, and on that day entered into a contract with W. T. Pritchard for the purchase by the latter of said property, by the terms of which said Pritchard went into possession of the same. While so in possession of said property under said contract…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Johnson v. SolidayNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Santa Cruz Rock Pavement Co. v. LyonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
  3. Wilkins v. LitchfieldSupreme Court of Iowa · 1886
  4. Callaway v. FreemanSupreme Court of Georgia · 1859

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. P. W. Wood, Inc. v. BlalackCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927

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

Powered by the Exa API