Legal Opinion

Watson v. Sutro

California Supreme Court

Decided December 27, 1888No. 12596PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order refusing a new trial. Motion to dismiss appeal. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

Hayne, C.

Motion to dismiss appeal from a judgment and from an order denying a new trial. The suit was to obtain a decree declaring that the plaintiff was the equitable owner of an undivided interest in certain real property, and for a partition, of the property among the several co-tenants. Findings were filed, and an interlocutory decree entered thereon, adjudging, among other things, that the plaintiff was the equitable owner, of five one hundred and sixtieths of' the property, and that the defendant Sutro held the legal title thereto in: trust for plaintiff, and directing a conveyance…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Thompson v. WhiteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
  2. Thompson v. WhiteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Ryer v. RyerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
  2. Herriman v. MenziesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  3. Johnson v. Phenix InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
  4. Niles v. GonzalezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
  5. Niles v. GonzalezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API