Eshleman v. Henrietta Vineyard Co.
California Supreme Court
Appeal from three judgments of the Superior Court •of Fresno County. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtPaterson, J.
The appeals in these three cases all rest upon the same statement of facts. Action 3180 is for the specific performance of a contract to sell certain lands. No. 3593 is for the partition of 14.46 acres of land which embrace the 8.06 acres for which specific *200performance is sought. Ho. 3653 is an action brought by the corporation and Malter to eject the plaintiff in the first action from the possession of the same 14.46 acres of land. In Eshleman, appellant, v. Henrietta Vineyard Company, respondent, Ho. 18018, this day filed, M. D. Eshleman appealed from that portion of the judgment entered in…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Smith v. LombardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
- Belli v. BonaviaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Mayhew v. WilhelmMichigan Supreme Court · 1930
- Lambert v. McClureCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1896
- Sanders v. CrabtreeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.