Wendt v. Stump

California Court of Appeal

Wendt v. Stump

283 P. 313, 102 Cal. App. 794, 1929 Cal. App. LEXIS 129

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedDecember 4, 1929

DocketDocket No. 7076.

StatusPublished

This text of 283 P. 313 (Wendt v. Stump) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Wendt v. Stump, 283 P. 313, 102 Cal. App. 794, 1929 Cal. App. LEXIS 129 (Cal. Ct. App. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

STURTEVANT, J.

The plaintiff commenced an action to quiet title. The defendants appeared and answered and filed a cross-complaint. The cross-complaint was answered and a trial was had before the court sitting without a jury. The court made findings in favor of the defendants and from a judgment entered thereon the plaintiff has appealed and has brought up typewritten transcripts.

The title to the property involved rests on the judgment that was involved in the action Wendt v. Gates et al. (Civil No. 7075), ante, p. 342 [283 Pac. 312], this day filed). In their cross-complaint the defendants pleaded that judgment in bar. The trial court made findings in favor of the defendants on the issues involving that judgment. The material facts and the law pertinent thereto are the same as in Wendt v. Gates et al. For the reasons there stated the judgment must be the same. Under these cir *795 cumstances it is unnecessary to discuss any other points made by the plaintiff.

The judgment is affirmed.

Nourse, J., and Koford, P. J., concurred.

A petition for a rehearing of this cause was denied by the District Court of Appeal on January 2, 1930.

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

STURTEVANT, J.

The plaintiff commenced an action to quiet title. The defendants appeared and answered and filed a cross-complaint. The cross-complaint was answered and a trial was had before the court sitting without a jury. The court made findings in favor of the defendants and from a judgment entered thereon the plaintiff has appealed and has brought up typewritten transcripts.

The title to the property involved rests on the judgment that was involved in the action Wendt v. Gates et al. (Civil No. 7075), ante, p. 342 [283 Pac. 312], this day filed). In their cross-complaint the defendants pleaded that judgment in bar. The trial court made findings in favor of the defendants on the issues involving that judgment. The material facts and the law pertinent thereto are the same as in Wendt v. Gates et al. For the reasons there stated the judgment must be the same. Under these cir *795 cumstances it is unnecessary to discuss any other points made by the plaintiff.

The judgment is affirmed.

Nourse, J., and Koford, P. J., concurred.

A petition for a rehearing of this cause was denied by the District Court of Appeal on January 2, 1930.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

283 P. 313, 102 Cal. App. 794, 1929 Cal. App. LEXIS 129, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wendt-v-stump-calctapp-1929.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack