Legal Opinion

Petersen v. Dynes

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 21, 1951No. Civ. 14475PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBray, J.

Plaintiff appealed from a judgment in favor of defendants in an action brought to reform an agreement evidenced by certain instructions to a title company on the ground of (1) mutual mistake, and (2) mistake by plaintiff known to' and concealed by defendants, and for a money judgment.

Question Presented

The insufficiency of the evidence to support the court’s findings based upon the claim that the evidence in favor of defendants is improbable and not sufficient legally to constitute a conflict with plaintiff’s evidence.

Facts

The controversy arises out of a sale by plaintiff to defendants of a…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Herbert v. LankershimCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
  2. Fewel & Dawes, Inc. v. PrattCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Lefrooth v. PrenticeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  4. Clarke v. FiedlerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
  5. Welk v. ConnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Vecki v. SorensenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
  2. Lake v. JacksonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
  3. Nikolaychuk v. Costco Wholesale Corp.District Court, E.D. California · 2025
  4. Wheat v. MorseCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961

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

Powered by the Exa API