Tom

Tom v. Eddy

Caution
137 Cal. App. 577·1934 Cal. App. LEXIS 945·31 P.2d 443
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 29, 1934Docket No. 7872.California701 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Conrey, J.

An action was pending (City of Los Angeles v. Wernott et al.) for condemnation of real property under the Street Opening Act of 1903. Among the defendants therein were Kibbe, owner of parcel 6, and Johnson, owner of parcel 7. Prior to entry of the interlocutory decree, parcel 6 was conveyed by grant from Kibbe to Heilman Commercial Trust and Savings Bank. Also, prior to entry of the interlocutory decree, parcel 7 was conveyed by grant from Johnson to F. J. Eddy and by Eddy to said bank.

The interlocutory judgment, which was entered July 14, 1927, made its awards in favor of the original defendants, Kibbe and Johnson. On September 23, 1927, the Merchants National Trust and Savings Bank (successor of said Heilman Bank) conveyed the two parcels to Alfred P. Tom. Thereafter, on March 26, 1928, the city of Los Angeles paid to Eddy (as the assignee of Kibbe and of Johnson under assignments made in November, 1927) the amount of said awards. Upon proof of these facts, in this action of the plaintiff Tom to recover said money from Eddy, the defendant Eddy moved for a nonsuit upon the ground that plaintiff was not the owner of the parcels condemned at the time the right to compensation for…

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.