Legal Opinion
Lierly v. McEwen
California Supreme Court
Decided January 9, 1930No. Docket No. L.A. 11812PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPreston, J.
Motion to dismiss appeal. This action involves the construction of a contract. It is to determine thereunder the respective rights of the parties to oil produced from certain properties and for royalties therefrom.
The cause was tried and judgment entered on February I, 1924, but upon appeal, on December 21, 1927, it was reversed, with direction that judgment be entered in accord with the opinion filed (Lierly v. McEwen, 87 Cal. App. 711 [262 Pac. 457]). Apparently this was not done, but a different judgment was entered. Thereafter a proceeding in mandamus was filed in the District Court of…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Price v. Sixth District Agricultural Assn.California Supreme Court · 1927
- Tobias v. AdamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
- Heinlen v. BeansCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Shank v. BlackburnCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
- Lamb v. OwenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Ferguson v. KeaysCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- Gore v. BingamanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Phillips v. PattersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
- Security-First National Bank v. MarxenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
- State, Department of Law Enforcement v. One 1955 Willys Jeep, V.I.N. 573481691Idaho Supreme Court · 1979
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.