Alphonzo E. Bell Corp. v. Listle
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtShinn, J.
The appeal which is before us was taken by K. L. Listle (sometimes referred to herein as defendant) from a judgment quieting plaintiff’s title against claims of interest in real property asserted by defendants under an oil lease. The judgment purports to rest upon findings that defendants breached their lease by failing to prosecute work thereunder and failing to1 resume and' diligently pursue work in conformity with the requirements of the lease after notice of default given by the lessor.
We have given the findings the moát liberal construction possible within reasonable limits, as we should…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Colyear v. TobrinerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
- Stockton Automobile Co. v. ConferCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
- Williams v. BerginCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Adams v. HelbingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Cargnani v. CargnaniCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1911
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Simpson v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
- Highland Plastics, Inc. v. EndersAppellate Division of the Superior Court of California · 1980
- Thierfeldt v. Marin Hospital DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1973
- Reserve Oil & Gas Co. v. MetzenbaumCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
- Alphonzo E. Bell Corp. v. ListleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.