Madden v. Hall
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Modoc County. Clarence A. Raker, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtChipman, P. J.
Action to quiet title claimed to have ripened by adverse possession. Plaintiff had judgment from which defendant appeals under the alternative method. The land involved is an eighty-acre tract, to wit: The S. W. % of the S. E. 14 of sec. 24 and the N. W. % of the N. E. 14 of see. 25, T. 43 N., R. 12 E., M. D. M., situated in Modoc County.
The court made the following findings:
III. That on February 11, 1893, a patent was issued by the United States to defendant and on that date defendant was the legal owner of the land involved and on that date and prior thereto “the said land and the whole…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Brumagim v. BradshawCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870
- Clark v. GilbertSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1872
- Reay v. ButlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Veal v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1883
- Hamilton v. FluornoyOregon Supreme Court · 1903
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- West v. EvansCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
- Westphal v. ArnouxCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- Faus v. Pacific Electric Ry. Co.(1956)California Court of Appeal · 1956
- Faria v. BettencourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
- Mattes v. HallCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1913
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.