Shermaster

Shermaster v. California Home Building Loan Co.

Good Law
1919 Cal. App. LEXIS 124·40 Cal. App. 661·181 P. 409
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 15, 1919Civ. No. 2671.California2,626 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Waste, J.

Plaintiff had judgment rescinding and canceling two contracts of sale and purchase of real property, and defendant appeals.

From the findings of fact, which are amply supported by the evidence, it appears that the parties entered into two contracts in writing, whereby they mutually agreed that defendant should sell, and plaintiff should buy from defendant, two lots of land situated in the city and county of San Francisco. The particular description of the lot of land, in each contract, began as follows: “Commencing at a point on the westerly line of Wieland Street, distant thereon, etc., from the southerly line of Sunnydale Avenue; running thence southerly along said westerly line of Wieland Street, etc.”

[1] Wieland Street was not, at the time of making of the contracts, and never had been, a public street south of Sunnydale Avenue. Some years previously the then owners of the property filed in the office of the county recorder of the city and county of San Francisco private maps showing the existence of such street, and indicating thereby a probable intention to dedicate the land to street purposes. No evi-' dence was offered to show acceptance by the city of this land, so…

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.