Legal Opinion
Witcher v. Conklin
California Supreme Court
Decided June 12, 1890No. 13291PublishedCited by 9 opinions
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the county of Modoc, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Vanclief, C.
The action is ejectment. Judgment for plaintiff, from which, and from an order denying his motion for a new trial, the defendant appeals.
The plaintiff claimed title under a pre-emption entry made by Albert Scherfen, evidenced by a receipt for the purchase-money from the receiver of the land-office at Susanville, California, of which the following is a copy:— “No. 1402.
“Receiver’s Office at Susanville, Cal.
“November 5, 1880.
“Received from Albert Scherfen, of Modoc County, California, the sum of two hundred dollars and-cents, being in full for the east half of northwest quarter,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Hutton v. FrisbieCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
- Toland v. MandellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
- Byers v. NealCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
- Stanway v. RubioCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875
- McDonald v. EdmondsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Janke v. McMahonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1913
- Graves v. HebbronCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Sacre v. ChalupnikCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
- Morse v. PicklerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1912
- Saecker v. CohnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.