Legal Opinion

Joens v. Baumbach

California Supreme Court

Decided May 15, 1924No. Sac. No. 3522PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWaste, J.

Plaintiff brought this action to quiet title. Judgment was entered for the defendant and plaintiff has appealed.

Appellant and respondent are the owners of adjoining parcels of land, that of the respondent being described as lying immediately north of that belonging to the appellant. The location of the boundary line between the two properties is really the point in dispute, and the controversy involves the title to a strip of land thirty feet in width. A solution of the problem presented by the appeal depends upon the proper interpretation to be given the description contained in the deed by…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Berton v. All Persons, Etc.California Supreme Court · 1917
  2. Moody v. PalmerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875
  3. Earl v. DutourCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. City Motel, Inc. v. State Ex Rel. State Department of HighwaysNevada Supreme Court · 1959
  2. City of Redlands v. NickersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
  3. Ferris v. EmmonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
  4. Peake v. Azusa Valley Savings BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
  5. Speer v. BlaskerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API