From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Speik v. Sutphin

Supreme Court of California
Feb 29, 1940
15 Cal.2d 764 (Cal. 1940)

Opinion

Docket No. L.A. 16530.

February 29, 1940.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Charles D. Ballard, Judge. Affirmed.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

John W. Preston, Crump Rogers and Wood, Crump Rogers for Appellant.

Leland J. Allen for Respondent.


[1] This is an action to quiet title and to obtain declaratory relief in respect to rights arising under an oil lease. The action raises the same issues as those presented in the companion case of Sutphin v. Speik, L.A. No. 17142 ( ante, p. 195 [ 99 P.2d 652]), this day decided. On the authority of that case the judgment is affirmed.

Edmonds, J., Carter, J., Curtis, J., Waste, C.J., Wood, J., pro tem., and McComb, J., pro tem., concurred.

Rehearing denied. Shenk, J., and Houser, J., did not participate.


Summaries of

Speik v. Sutphin

Supreme Court of California
Feb 29, 1940
15 Cal.2d 764 (Cal. 1940)
Case details for

Speik v. Sutphin

Case Details

Full title:FREDERICK A. SPEIK, Appellant, v. I.O. SUTPHIN, Respondent

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Feb 29, 1940

Citations

15 Cal.2d 764 (Cal. 1940)
99 P.2d 656

Citing Cases

Sutphin v. Speik

We are today deciding the quiet title suit by a memorandum opinion. ( Speik v. Sutphin, L.A. No. 16530, post,…