Emile v. Van Bever
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
JAMISON, J., pro tem.
The sole question involved on this appeal is whether or not the land in controversy was and is a valid homestead. The trial court so found and rendered judgment for defendants. From this judgment plaintiff has appealed.
On September 25, 1923, appellant recovered judgment against defendant Emile Y. Yan Bever in the sum of $385 for rent of premises upon which respondents, husband and wife, were living. Thereafter, on October 23, 1929, appellant commenced an aetion to revive the lien of said judgment, and same was revived in the sum of $547.79, together *660with interest and…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Fitzell v. LeakyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Beaton v. ReidCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Waggle v. WorthyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Schmidt v. DenningCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
- Graham v. HuntCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- California Bank v. SchlesingerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
- Coca Cola Bottling Co. v. FelicianoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
- California Bank v. SchlesingerAppellate Division of the Superior Court of California · 1958