Richter v. Union Land & Stock Co.
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
SMITH, C.
The plaintiff recovered judgment for the sum of eight hundred dollars, with interest from April 16, 1892, and costs—the principal sum adjudged being the amount of the consideration paid by the plaintiff to the defendant on a contract of the date named which the defendant had failed to perform.
The defendant appeals from the judgment and from an order denying a new trial. The material facts, as disclosed by the pleadings and findings, are as follows: The contract in question was accompanied, or rather preceded, by a deed of the same date from the defendant to the plaintiff…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Lawrence v. GayettyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Kelley v. OwensCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- Sivers v. SiversCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Hayes v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Schultz v. McLeanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by60 opinions
- Masterson v. SineCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- Philpott v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
- Union Sugar Co. v. Hollister Estate Co.California Supreme Court · 1935
- Rutherford Holdings, LLC v. Plaza Del ReyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
- Richard v. Credit SuisseNew York Court of Appeals · 1926
55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.