Legal Opinion

McNutt v. Nuevo Land Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided March 23, 1914No. L.A. No. 3170PublishedCited by 18 opinions

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Riverside County and from an order refusing a new trial. E. E. Densmore, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.

Another action involving much of the law and many of the facts here presented was brought by these plaintiffs against the same defendants. To the complaint in that action a general demurrer was sustained. An appeal was taken to this court which will be found reported in Smith v. McNutt, 156 Cal. 769, [106 Pac. 70]. Por convenience, however, the facts may be briefly recapitulated. The Lake View Land Company owing a certain indebtedness to John Wolfskill, another independent indebtedness to L. P. Hansen, a third to the law firm of Smith, McNutt & Hannon for legal services, made to Mr. McNutt of…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Sichler v. LookCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  2. Goodenow v. EwerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
  3. Starkweather v. JennerSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
  4. Felton v. Le BretonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  5. Easton v. German-American BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1888

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Steinour v. Oakley State BankIdaho Supreme Court · 1928
  2. Bateman v. KelloggCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
  3. Lincoln Joint Stock Land Bank v. MitchellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1948
  4. Hawkins v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1936
  5. Huntington v. PerrinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API