Solomon

Solomon v. Redona

Good Law
1921 Cal. App. LEXIS 271·52 Cal. App. 300·198 P. 643
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 18, 1921Civ. No. 3164.California2,388 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Finlayson, J.

Helen R. Solomon, now deceased, brought this action for a partition of real property alleged to be owned by herself and two of the defendants as tenants in common. From an interlocutory decree in favor of plaintiff the defendant Carlos Redona appeals. Helen R. Solomon having died after the appeal was perfected, the administrator of her estate was duly substituted as plaintiff in her stead. Notwithstanding the substitution, we shall, for convenience, refer to Helen R. Solomon as the plaintiff and respondent, just as though she were still alive and prosecuting the appeal in her own name.

One of the points made by appellant is that the owner of an undivided one-tenth was not made a party to the action, and that, therefore, the decree does not determine the interests of all the various co-owners.

The complaint alleges that plaintiff is the owner of an undivided three-fifths of a lot in the city of Los Angeles; that the defendant and appellant Carlos Redona is the owner of an undivided one-fifth, and that Jose S. Redona, another defendant, is the owner of the remaining undivided one-fifth. Carlos Redona, answering, denied that plaintiff and Jose S. Redona own three-fifths and…

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.