Rice v. Carey

151 P. 133, 170 Cal. 804, 1915 Cal. LEXIS 461
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Rice v. Carey. Read the opinion of the Court — 170 Cal. 748
California Supreme Court·Decided August 5, 1915·No. Sac. No. 2144.·Published

Opinion

This action involves the validity of a deed claimed to have been executed by J.M. Hood in his lifetime to Georgiene Ruth Carey, his granddaughter. The case is essentially similar in its facts and in the law applicable thereto to Rice v. Carey (Sac. No. 2145), ante, p. 748, [151 P. 135], just decided. Here, as there, the judgment went in favor of the plaintiffs and the defendant appeals.

For the reasons stated in the decision just referred to, the action of the superior court in the case at bar must be upheld.

The judgment is affirmed.

Shaw, J., Melvin, J., Lorigan, J., Henshaw, J., Lawlor, J., and Angellotti, C.J., concurred. *Page 805

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Rice v. Carey, 151 P. 133, 170 Cal. 804, 1915 Cal. LEXIS 461 (Cal. 1915).

151 P. 133 (Rice v. Carey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Rice v. Carey
151 P. 135 (California Supreme Court, 1915)