Harding & Loftin v. Jasper
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Tenth District. To the facts stated by the Court, add that the travel over the road in question began in 1849, and continued up to about the fall of 1857, when plaintiffs closed up the road; that the patent for the land embraced in the Johnson grant, issued to him in March, 1857; that Woodruff, though owning an interest in the grant from 1849, did not have the fee until October, 1857, when a deed was made to him by Robinson, of a portion of the grant.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Tenth District. To the facts stated by the Court, add that the travel over the road in question began in 1849, and continued up to about the fall of 1857, when plaintiffs closed up the road; that the patent for the land embraced in the Johnson grant, issued to him in March, 1857; that Woodruff, though owning an interest in the grant from 1849, did not have the fee until October, 1857, when a deed was made to him by Robinson, of a portion of the grant. That Woodruff sold to plaintiffs in October, 1857, and that this suit was begun in the fall of 1858, for a trespass alleged to…
1Opinion of the CourtBaldwin, J.
This is an action of trespass for entering upon plaintiffs’ land and removing gates, etc. The particular piece of land entered was the bed of an old road, which had been used as a highway; and the defendant justified, as overseer of this road—which he claimed to be a public road of Yuba County—the removing of the gate as an obstruction. - The title to the land was in the plaintiffs by deraignment from the grantee of a Mexican grant; and the main question in dispute on the trial was the question *645of fact whether this land in controversy had been dedicated to the public as a highway. As the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- President of Cincinnati v. Lessee of WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1832
- Trustees of Watertown v. Cowen & BaggNew York Court of Chancery · 1834
- The Town of Pawlet v. D. CLARK & OTHERSSupreme Court of the United States · 1815
- Irwin v. DixionSupreme Court of the United States · 1850
- McConnell v. Trustees of Town of LexingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1827
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by58 opinions
- Archer v. Salinas CityCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Buntin v. City of DanvilleSupreme Court of Virginia · 1896
- Union Transportation Co. v. Sacramento CountyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
- Western Aggregates, Inc. v. County of YubaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
- City of San Francisco v. CanavanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
53 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.