Legal Opinion

Southern Pacific Land Co. v. Dickerson

California Supreme Court

Decided February 7, 1922No. L. A. No. 5769PublishedCited by 19 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtLennon, J.

Southern Pacific Land Company instituted the present action against the defendant Dickerson for the purpose of quieting title to and recovering possession of certain land in Imperial County, California, and for damages for withholding possession of the said land. Defendant’s answer specifically denied the material allegations of the complaint and, in addition, interposed the defense of the statute of limitations and title by adverse possession. When the cause came on for trial, a jury was impaneled and, after the introduction of evidence, argument of counsel, and oral instructions, the jury…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Slocum v. New York Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
  2. Herbert v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1898
  3. Estate of CasparCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  4. Estate of SharonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
  5. Donahue v. MeisterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Dorsey v. BarbaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
  2. Estate of GreenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Campanella v. CampanellaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  4. Hoopes v. DolanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
  5. Castro v. Sutter Creek Union High School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API