Thompson v. O'Neil
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco. The case was tried by the Court without a jury, and the following findings were filed: “First—That on or about the 15th day of January, 1851, one John P. Hill took up a tract of land of forty acres (of which the land in suit forms a part) and inclosed the same with a temporary brush fence.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco. The case was tried by the Court without a jury, and the following findings were filed: “First—That on or about the 15th day of January, 1851, one John P. Hill took up a tract of land of forty acres (of which the land in suit forms a part) and inclosed the same with a temporary brush fence. The same was within the charter line of 1850. “ Second—That said Hill, having conveyed undivided interests in said forty-acre tract to R. S. Thompson, W. P. Flint, T. Dorland, F. P. Tracy, Staples, and Bedell,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Crockett, J.:
The action is ejectment, and was tried before the Court without a jury. Written findings were filed, and a judgment entered for the defendant, from which the plaintiff appeals on the judgment roll alone, unsupported by a statement on appeal. The ground of error relied upon is that, on the facts expressly found, the plaintiff, and not the defendant, was entitled to judgment. But we must presume, in support of the judgment, that the Court found not only the facts included in the written findings, but also such other facts within the issues as are necessary to support…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Sperling v. CalfeeMontana Supreme Court · 1888
- Gay v. HavermaleWashington Supreme Court · 1903
- McMillan v. CarterMontana Supreme Court · 1886