Legal Opinion
Crimmins v. Gould
California Court of Appeal
Decided March 25, 1957No. Civ. 17206PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBray, J.
Plaintiff sued in declaratory and injunctive relief primarily to determine that defendants have no rights in a certain roadway. Defendants cross-complained for like relief primarily to establish their rights in said roadway. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff and against defendants and cross-complainants, the latter appeal.
Questions Presented
1. Did “McCormick Lane” become a public way?
2. Was the easement in said lane extinguished by misuse?
3. Should lesser relief have been granted plaintiff?
4. Amendment of complaint to conform to the proof.
5. Was the court’s determination unconstitutional?
E…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Lux v. HagginCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Winslow v. City of VallejoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
- Union Transportation Co. v. Sacramento CountyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
- City of Venice v. Short Line Beach Land Co.California Supreme Court · 1919
- Penn Bowling Recreation Center, Inc. v. Hot Shoppes, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1949
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Reichardt v. HoffmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1997
- Wetmore v. Ladies of Loretto, WheatonAppellate Court of Illinois · 1966
- Valley View Angus Ranch, Inc. v. Duke Energy Field Services, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2007
- Breliant v. Preferred Equities Corp.Nevada Supreme Court · 1993
- Wall v. RudolphCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.