Gold

Gold v. Phelan

Caution
1922 Cal. App. LEXIS 266·58 Cal. App. 471·208 P. 1001
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 5, 1922Civ. No. 3909.California2,110 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

James, J.

This is a summary proceeding brought to obtain possession of a house and premises which plaintiff alleged she was the owner of and which she alleged defendants forcibly detained in the manner described, in section 1160 of the Code of Civil Procedure. By the judgment possession of the property was directed to be delivered to plaintiff, and it was provided that the defendants pay damages in the sum of $224.14, with costs. Prom that judgment the defendants have appealed.

The main contention urged • on this appeal is that the findings of the court are not sustained by the evidence. It appears from the testimony set forth in the record that early in the month of April, 1921, Ted Elliot was a real estate broker doing business in the city of Pasadena. There were several salesmen attached to his office. One of these, Randall, was known to the plaintiff as a customer in her husband’s store. Plaintiff was the owner of a house and lot. The house was furnished and rented to a tenant. There was a mortgage encumbrance against the property of $1,200. Plaintiff testified that she told Randall, about two months before the making of the alleged sale hereinafter referred to, to “sell the property”;…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.