Legal Opinion

Provensal v. Michel

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 1, 1928No. Docket No. 6220PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

PARKER, J., pro tem.

—This is an action in equity wherein plaintiff seeks to have set aside and declared of no effect a certain conveyance of real estate executed by her to defendant Joseph Michel. The property in question since the original transfer has been conveyed to other parties defendant. Prom a judgment in favor of defendants the plaintiff presents this appeal.

The complaint alleges that plaintiff was and is a widow, with little knowledge of the English language and having no familiarity with business transactions; that Joseph Michel, a trusted friend of plaintiff and her deceased…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Stockton Combined Harvester & Agricultural Works v. Glens Falls Insurance Co.California Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Loftus v. FischerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Fitts v. Mission Health & Beauty ShopCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
  4. Curns v. BrannonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
  5. Garin v. PeltonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. K. King and G. Shuler Corp. v. KingCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968

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

Powered by the Exa API