Legal Opinion

Reynolds v. Mead

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 4, 1944No. Civ. No. 12547PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSturtevant, J.

The plaintiff as guardian of A. L. Reynolds, an incompetent person, commenced an action against the defendant. In his second amended complaint he pleaded a cause of action to quiet title and a cause of action for rescission. The defendant answered, both counts. The trial court made findings in favor of the defendant. From the judgment entered thereon the plaintiff appealed. He claims the judgment is not sustained by the evidence. We think he is mistaken.

In 1936, A. L. Reynolds was the owner of a certain lot in Ukiah. On it was a house in which he lived. He was also the owner of certain…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Farmers' Natl. Gold Bank v. StoverCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
  2. Pierson v. McCahillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863
  3. Peters v. FossCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
  4. Connalley v. PeckCalifornia Supreme Court · 1853
  5. Kirstein v. MaddenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Roemer v. Retail Credit Co.California Court of Appeal · 1975
  2. Hunt v. SmythCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
  3. Meadows v. LeeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1985
  4. Meadows v. LeeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1985

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

Powered by the Exa API