Legal Opinion
McLane v. Storr
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 22, 1946No. Civ. 15178PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWood, J.
Action for specific performance. Defendant Storr appeals from the judgment that John W. Mattox, the assignee of plaintiffs, should be substituted as plaintiff, and that defendants should convey the property to him.
Under a written contract, dated June 15,1938, and recorded August 11, 1938, defendant Mrs. Van Eaton agreed to sell to John W. Mattox, and he agreed to buy from her, certain real-property for the sum of $318, payable in installments of $10 per month. Under a written assignment, dated May 15, 1939, and recorded on that day, Mattox assigned his interest in said contract to plaintiffs…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- James v. JamesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
- Rabbit v. AtkinsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
- Curtin v. SalomonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
- McCartney v. CampbellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
- McLane v. Van EatonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
3Cited by8 opinions
- Greco v. Oregon Mutual Fire InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
- United States v. Certain Parcels of Land SituateDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1949
- Miller v. KeeganCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
- Manig v. BachmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- Hansen v. G & G TRUCKING CO.California Court of Appeal · 1965
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.