Legal Opinion
Harless v. Carter
California Supreme Court
Decided March 1, 1954No. L. A. 22469PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, J.
Betty Harless, the holder of an unforeclosed .street improvement bond, sued to partition certain real property owned by Armistead B. Carter, whom the trial court found to be a bona fide purchaser for value of the land under a tax deed from the state. The appeal is from a judgment which declares that the lien of the bond has been extinguished and directs its cancellation.
The bond was issued in 1928 pursuant to the Improvement Act of 1911 (Stats. 1911, p. 730; Sts. & Hy. Code, div. 7, §§ 5000-6794), the last installment being due in 1938. In 1934, the land was deeded to the state for delinquent…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Scheas v. RobertsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
- Uhl v. BadaraccoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
- Rombotis v. FinkCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
- County of Los Angeles v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
- Woods v. HydeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- State Water Resources Control Board CasesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
- Mass v. Board of EducationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
- People v. LedesmaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
- Larson v. State Personnel BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
- Franklin v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.