Legal Opinion

Conner v. Hutchinson

California Supreme Court

Decided January 15, 1859Published

Appeal from the Sixth District, County of Sacramento. A statement of facts appears in the opinion of the Court.

1Opinion of the CourtField, J.

*127This was an action upon a promissory note of the defendant. The answer sets up, as an offset, a claim for services rendered and moneys expended on behalf of the plaintiff. It appears, from the evidence, that the parties and several other persons were tenants in common of a large tract of land situated in Yolo county, claiming title under an alleged Mexican grant, and that in March, 1856, the claimants entered into an agreement for the partition of the premises, and the prosecution of proceedings for a confirmation of the grant in the United States Courts, and, to carry into effect its…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Doremus & Wilbur v. SeldenNew York Supreme Court · 1821

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

Powered by the Exa API