Noyes

Noyes v. Huffman

Good Law
1919 Cal. App. LEXIS 519·41 Cal. App. 676·183 P. 284
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 20, 1919Civ. No. 2803.California787 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Brittain, J.

A. J. Coll, one of the defendants, appeals by the alternative method from a decree quieting the plaintiff’s title to land in Fresno County. The suit was against one Huffman, Josephine E. Warner, formerly Rybka, Coll, and fictitious defendants. Huffman and Mrs. Warner defaulted and the suit was dismissed as to the fictitious defendants, leaving Coll as the only active defendant. Apparently he admitted the legal title of the plaintiff and claimed a right of conveyance from the plaintiff under a series of contracts, of which none are printed in the briefs. Neither was there printed in the appellant’s brief nor in an appendix, Coil’s answer, the findings or the decree. A portion of the findings and a skeletonized statement of certain oral testimony are printed in the appellant’s brief, and there are general statements of fact referring to pages of the typewritten record. From this unsatisfactory presentation of facts it is gleaned that the plaintiff entered into a contract to sell to Huffman on time the land in controversy; that Huffman assigned to Mrs. Warner his interest in the contract, and that Mrs. Warner entered into a contract with Coll in which, representing herself as the…

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.