Legal Opinion
Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Co. v. Lindquist
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided December 17, 1929No. 5703PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DIETRICH, Circuit Judge.
This is another of the Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Cases [see Melin Case (C. C. A., No. 5671) 36 F.(2d) 907].
The contract of purchase, alleged to have been procured through fraudulent representations, was executed September 29, 1921, and the complaint herein was filed April 24, 1928. The only averment in the complaint to account for the delay is that “plaintiffs did not discover the falsity of -said representations or any of them until January 1928.” Defendant demurred upon 'the ground that the complaint did not state facts sufficient, and particularly because the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Lady Washington Consolidated Co. v. WoodCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Co. v. TipperCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1929
- Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Co. v. ZdarskyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1929
- Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Co v. JeppsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1929
3Cited by3 opinions
- Foster & Kleiser Co. v. Special Site Sign Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1936
- Prentiss v. McWhirterCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1933
- Sacramento Suburban Fruit Land Co. v. LindquistCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1930