Griesemer v. Hammond
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Alameda County denying a new trial. John Ellsworth, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtKerrigan, J.
This is an appeal from an order denying defendants’ motion for a new trial in an action to recover money paid as a deposit on a contract for the purchase of land.
On the twenty-fourth day of October, 1907, Hammond & Hammond, copartners, as agents of the defendant, F. S. Kelly, entered into a contract with the plaintiff, whereby the latter was to purchase a certain parcel of land situated in Alameda county and pay therefor the sum of $13,500. At the time of the execution of the contract the plaintiff paid said agents the sum of $1,350 on account of and as a deposit to secure the sale of said…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Higgins v. . EagletonNew York Court of Appeals · 1898
- Easton v. MontgomeryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Ziehen v. . SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
- Weber v. McClevertyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
- Hanson v. FoxCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Schwerin Estate Realty Co. v. SlyeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- Miller v. SnedekerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1960
- Pitt v. MallalieuCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
- Seymour v. ShaefferCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
- Lloyd v. Locke-Paddon Land Co.California Court of Appeal · 1935
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.