Collins v. Eksoozian
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.
The plaintiffs instituted this action for the purpose of securing a decree foreclosing, or declaring forfeited, all rights acquired by the defendant under a written contract whereby the former agreed to sell and convey to the defendant and the latter agreed to purchase from said plaintiffs a certain tract of land situated in Tulare County.
The defendant was given judgment, from which the plaintiffs appeal on a bill of exceptions.
The agreement was entered into on the twenty-second day of September, 1919, and contains, among others, the following provisions and terms: That the purchase price of…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Glock v. Howard & Wilson Colony Co.California Supreme Court · 1898
- Grey v. TubbsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
- Newton v. HullCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Frost v. Railroad CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- Martin v. MorganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Barkis v. ScottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
- Barkis v. ScottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
- Henck v. Lake Hemet Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1937
- Breitman v. GattmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
- Freeman v. LindCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.