Legal Opinion

Lamkin v. Vierra

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 18, 1961No. Civ. No. 19676PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAgee, J.

Defendants appeal from a judgment on the pleadings holding that a deposit receipt agreement for the sale and purchase of certain realty was void, and that therefore plaintiffs were entitled to the return of their deposit and were not liable in damages on defendants’ cross-complaint.

Joseph Y. Yierra died intestate on July 14, 1946, and was at the time of his death the sole owner of the residential property located at 2521 East 27th Street, Oakland, California.

On April 11, 1959, plaintiffs, who are husband and wife, signed a regular form deposit receipt agreement agreeing to purchase the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Texas Co. v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
  2. Pryor v. DowneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875
  3. Estate of MacHadoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
  4. In Re Estate of HeeneyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1906
  5. Bowden v. PierceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Andre Flowers v. DancyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
  2. Estate Realty, Inc. v. KershawUtah Supreme Court · 1973
  3. In the Matter of the Estate of TorresSuperior Court of Guam · 2009

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

Powered by the Exa API