Legal Opinion
Roy & Titcomb, Inc. v. Villa
Arizona Supreme Court
Decided February 24, 1931No. Civil No. 2960PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMcALISTER, C. J.
This is an action by D. N. Villa against Catalina Villa, Catalina Villa as executrix of the estate of Lorenzo Villa, deceased, and Boy & Titcomb, Incorporated, praying for a decree establishing her title to certain real estate in Phoenix, Arizona, and canceling a mortgage thereon executed by Lorenzo Villa and Catalina Villa, his wife, to Boy & Titcomb, Incorporated.
The facts in the case are undisputed and may be briefly stated. In June, 1911, the plaintiff purchased a house and lot in the City of Phoenix from the O'’Mall ey Lumber Company for $980 to be paid in monthly installments. Her son,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Follette v. Pacific Light & Power Corp.California Supreme Court · 1922
- Garbutt v. MayoSupreme Court of Georgia · 1907
- Carolina Portland Cement Co. v. RoperSupreme Court of Florida · 1914
- Niles v. CooperSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- Scheerer v. CuddyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Valley National Bank of Ariz. v. Avco Develop. Co.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1971
- Condon v. Arizona Housing CorporationArizona Supreme Court · 1945
- Keck v. BrookfieldCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1965
- Miller v. CondonArizona Supreme Court · 1947
- In re the City of St. LouisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1963
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.