# Hobart v. Hobart Estate Co.

> California Supreme Court · May 29, 1945 · 26 Cal. 2d 412

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9546008

## Case

- **Full name:** WALTER S. HOBART, Respondent, v. HOBART ESTATE COMPANY (A Corporation) Et Al., Appellants
- **Court:** California Supreme Court
- **Decided:** May 29, 1945
- **Citations:** 26 Cal. 2d 412; 159 P.2d 958; 1945 Cal. LEXIS 167
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Spence
- **Judges:** Gibson, Spence
- **Cited by:** 295 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9546008

## Opinion text

SPENCE, J.
I concur in the reversal of the judgments upon the grounds stated but cannot subscribe to all that is said in the majority opinion. In my opinion, the judgments should be reversed upon the further grounds: (1) that the evidence, as a matter of law, was insufficient to establish ac *453 tionable fraud and (2) that plaintiff’s alleged cause of action, as a matter of law, was barred by the statute of limitations. I am of the view that the facts and the law relating to these further grounds for reversal were exhaustively and correctly discussed in the dissenting opinion written by Mr. Justice Knight at the time this cause was pending in the District Court of Appeal, to which dissenting opinion reference is hereby made. (Hobart v. Hobart Estate Co., (Cal.App.) 148 P.2d 41 , 59.)
Edmonds, J., concurred.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9546008. Public record. Not legal advice.