Rousset v. Boyle
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco. On the 12th of October, 1868, the plaintiff commenced an action of ejectment to recover a tract of land, being a part of the Rancho Laguna de la Merced. The complaint described the demanded premises by metes and bounds, but did not state the number of acres.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco. On the 12th of October, 1868, the plaintiff commenced an action of ejectment to recover a tract of land, being a part of the Rancho Laguna de la Merced. The complaint described the demanded premises by metes and bounds, but did not state the number of acres. After the case was at issue,, and- on the 26th day of July, 1870, the cause w.as tried before the Court, without a.jury.- July 26th, 1870, the Court pronounced judgment from the bench in favor of the plaintiff. A judgment was entered by the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court:
The order appealed from was lately affirmed here on the ground that it was not supported by a statement on appeal. The fact has since been suggested at the bar that this defect was cured by a stipulation between the counsel which was not called to our attention. W e take this occasion to say that it is the duty of counsel to see that the copies of the transcript intended for the members of the Court literally conform to the transcript filed in the office of the Clerk. In the great majority of cases we never see the transcript filed in the Clerk’s office, but depend entirely upon…
2Cited by13 opinions
- People v. GoldensonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Kaufman v. ShainCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Territory of Montana v. ClaytonMontana Supreme Court · 1888
- City and County of San Francisco v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
- People v. MurbackCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.