Walsh v. Hill
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Third District, Alameda County. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtSarderson, J.
First—The first point involves the construction of the deed from Crowell to the plaintiff’s grantors, Bensley, Mason and Himrod. The question is, whether the land in controversy is included in the calls of the deed.
The land is a part of the Potrero Nueva, in the City of San Francisco. It is situated on the sidehill to the south of Mission bay, and is bounded on the north by marsh lands and mud flats which border Mission bay on the south—the north line being the line dividing the marsh from the high land, or the line of ordinary high water; on the east by land belonging to one Piercy, the east…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Moss v. ShearCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
- Jones v. ChilesCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1834
- Reamer v. NesmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
- Piercy v. CrandallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
- Gunn v. BatesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1856
3Cited by53 opinions
- Triplett v. . WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
- American Bonding Co. of Baltimore v. Pueblo Inv. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1906
- Webber v. ClarkeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- A. Leschen & Sons Rope Co. v. Mayflower Gold Mining & Reduction Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1909
- Morffew v. S.F. & San Rafael R.R.California Supreme Court · 1895
48 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.