Richards v. Fraser
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Joaquin County and from an order denying a new trial. Edward J. Jones, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
BRITT, C.
Among other allegations of the complaint here plaintiff charges, in substance, that in December, 1891, himself and the defendants, Eraser, Rosenbaum and Guernsey, formed a copartnership for the purpose of buying and farming a tract of three thousand acres of land, called the Sargent tract, the parties to share' equally in profits and losses; that by a conspiracy between defendants and the seller the real purchase price of the land—forty dollars an acre—was concealed from plaintiff, and he was fraudulently induced to contribute and did contribute to the purchase of the same at the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Kley v. . HealyNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Pomeroy v. BentonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1874
- Zebley v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1893
- Gilson Quartz Mining Co. v. GilsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
- Belden v. HenriquesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1857
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Sime v. MaloufCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
- MacIsaac v. PozzoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
- Matteson v. WagonerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
- Menefee v. OxnamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
- Haserot v. KellerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.