Alaniz

Alaniz v. Casenave

Good Law
1891 Cal. LEXIS 1047·91 Cal. 41·27 P. 521
Supreme Court of CaliforniaSeptember 5, 1891No. 14156California1,570 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Temple, J.

This action is for an accounting and to compel the reconveyance of real estate.

The complaint charges that defendant Pierre is the husband of the other defendant, who is the niece and adopted daughter of plaintiff; that after their marriage, in 1870, defendant Pierre took charge of plaintiff’s business, and has ever since continued to manage and control the same as her agent; that in 1874 plaintiff sold some property, and placed the proceeds, about twenty-two thousand dollars, in the hands of said Pierre to *44 manage for her; that with a portion of the money he purchased certain lots in Los Angeles, taking the deeds in her name, but retained the larger portion of the money; that on the seventeenth day of June, 1875, he proposed to her that for the purpose of managing her business she should convey all the lands to him, promising to manage and control the same for her, and reconvey on demand, and thereupon she conveyed all of the lands to him for the purposes mentioned; that she was living in the family of defendants at the time, had unlimited confidence in him, and was entirely under his control in business matters, being herself an illiterate and ignorant woman, entirely…

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.