Legal Opinion

Crofton v. Young

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 12, 1941No. Civ. 2828PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBarnard, P. J.

This is an appeal from orders entered in a quiet title action. A prior attempt to review most of these orders through certiorari proceedings failed because the orders were appealable. (Young v. Superior Court, 16 Cal. (2d) 211 [105 Pac. (2d) 363].)

The defendant bank recovered a judgment against Thomas N. Crofton and levied execution on the real property in question which Crofton had previously conveyed to his son, the plaintiff herein. The bank assigned its judgment to one Neal. Thereafter, the plaintiff brought this action to quiet his title to the land, naming the bank as sole defendant. On…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Baird v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Farrar v. SteenberghCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  3. Brooks v. WhiteCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1913
  4. Young v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Burtnett v. KingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  2. Potts v. WhitsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  3. Ackerman v. AckermanDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1981
  4. Dauenhauer v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
  5. Muller v. RobinsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959

10 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