Hunt v. Friedman

63 Cal. 510 ·

Supreme Court of California · Filed

Published · citable

Holding

The court held that no resulting trust arose in favor of the appellant’s predecessor because the property was purchased by the respondent with his own funds for his sole benefit, and that a subsequent, ambiguous written receipt did not constitute a valid declaration of an express trust.

Source: cap_files. Verify against the official reporter before relying on this text.