Miller & Lux, Inc. v. Sparkman
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtPlummer, J.
The plaintiff had judgment against the defendant for the sum of $915.01, based on an action to recover that sum on account of taxes paid by the plaintiff, which the complaint alleges should have been paid by the defendant.
On the fifteenth day of February, 1927, the plaintiff and the defendant entered into an agreement of purchase and sale, whereby the plaintiff agreed to sell to the defendant, and the defendant agreed to buy from the plaintiff all that certain tract of land situate and being in the county of Madera, state of California, described as follows, to wit: All of section 7, township…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Green v. SkinnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
- San Gabriel Valley Land & Water Co. v. Witmer Bros.California Supreme Court · 1892
- Marr v. RhodesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Anderson v. YoakumCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Fickling v. JackmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Brandtjen & Kluge v. FincherCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
- Blumenthal v. LiebmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
- Riley v. TurpinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
- Page v. PodolCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
- Brandtjen & Kluge, Inc. v. FincherAppellate Division of the Superior Court of California · 1941
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.