Hendershott v. Shipman
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtShenk, J.
The plaintiffs sued to quiet title to a lot in the city of Los Angeles. The defendants Shipman answered and denied the validity of the plaintiff’s alleged title. They admitted a claim of ownership in themselves. The judgment was that the plaintiffs were not the owners of the lot. The defendants appealed because the judgment also declared that the plaintiffs had a valid and subsisting lien on the property.
The appeal is on the judgment roll which discloses the following:
The plaintiffs commenced proceedings to foreclose a street improvement bond issued August 31, 1928, pursuant to the…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Sears v. RuleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
- Baar v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
- Holland v. HotchkissCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Peterson v. GibbsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
- Burns v. HiattCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Marks v. WhitneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- Shilts v. YoungAlaska Supreme Court · 1982
- Elbert, Ltd. v. ClareCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
- Hendershott v. ShipmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- Baucum v. LeBaronCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.