Cummings v. Roeth
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Alameda County, and from an order denying a new trial. John Ellsworth, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtChipman, P. J.
This is an action to enforce the specific performance of a contract entered into by defendant Roeth with plaintiffs to convey land. Judgment passed for defendants from which and from the order denying their motion for a new trial, plaintiffs appeal.
The following are the facts averred in the amended and supplemental complaint, and in an amendment thereto filed by leave of court at the trial: That plaintiffs are husband and wife, and on March 26, 1906, defendant Roeth, being then the owner of certain real property, situated in the city of Oakland, entered into a written agreement with…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Newman v. FreitasCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Prince v. LambCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Seymour v. DelancyNew York Supreme Court · 1824
- White v. SageCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
- Stiles v. CainCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Wilson v. WhiteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- Boulenger v. MorisonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
- Andersen v. CharlesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- Page v. BrownCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
- Gorges v. JohnsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959