Legal Opinion

Merrill v. Merrill

California Supreme Court

Decided April 27, 1894No. 19319PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtGaroutte, J.

This is an action by the respondent, vendee, to recover back a sum of money paid to the appellant, vendor, as a partial payment upon the purchase price of a certain tract of realty under a contract of sale. Respondent made no tender of the balance due, and demanded no deed, but alleged in her complaint that defendant rescinded the contract, and she bases her right of recovery upon the alleged acts constituting the rescission. She recovered judgment in the trial court, and this appeal is taken from that order, and from the order denying a motion for a new trial.

This case has once been before…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Shively v. Semi-Tropic Land & Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1893
  2. Windhaus v. BootzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  3. Merrill v. MerrillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Smith v. JaccardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912
  2. Lemle v. BarryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
  3. Smith v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  4. Winter v. KittoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
  5. Rankin v. NewmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895

4 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