Hanson v. Goldsmith
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtLorigan, J.
This is an action to quiet title. The complaint contained the allegations usual to such an action; that plaintiff was the owner of certain lands in the city and county of San Francisco described by courses and distances and consisting of Potrero Nuevo block No. 560, and a part of Potrero Nuevo block No. 555; that defendant asserted a claim thereto adversely to plaintiff but without right, and asked for a decree quieting the title of the plaintiff to the property. Defendant answered denying that plaintiff was the owner of the property; admitted that he asserted a claim and interest in the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Bank of Lemoore v. FulghamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- Johnson v. TaylorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- Islais & Salinas Water Co. v. AllenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- Palomares Land Co. v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
- Chapman v. ZoberleinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Interstate Realty & Improvement Co. v. ClarkCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
- McCracken v. HummelCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
- Schainman v. All PersonsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
- Sormano v. WoodCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
- Gallentine v. HickeyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.