Legal Opinion

Huston v. Walker

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1874No. 3,812PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, San Joaquin County. The action was ejectment. The plaintiff had received a patent from the United States before the action was commenced. The defendant set up the equitable defense stated in the opinion, and asked the Court to decree that the plaintiff execute the agreement, by conveying the land to the defendant, and that the plaintiff be enjoined from asserting title to the premises.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, San Joaquin County. The action was ejectment. The plaintiff had received a patent from the United States before the action was commenced. The defendant set up the equitable defense stated in the opinion, and asked the Court to decree that the plaintiff execute the agreement, by conveying the land to the defendant, and that the plaintiff be enjoined from asserting title to the premises. The plaintiff had judgment, and the defendant appealed therefrom, and from an order subsequently made denying a new trial.

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court, Wallace, C. J.:

The plaintiff, holding the United States patent has the ■ legal title to the premises in controversy, and the judgment *485in his favor was correctly rendered, unless the action was barred by the Statute of Limitations, or unless the equitable defense set up by the defendant in possession will avail him.

1. The proof was substantially conflicting as to whether the possession had been adverse for the period of five, years after the patent issued, and we will not disturb the finding upon that issue.

2. The equitable defense set up is based upon a supposed agreement…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Damrell v. MeyerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Mitchell v. ClineCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  2. Thompson v. DoaksumCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
  3. O'Hanlon v. DenvirCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  4. Roy v. Harney Peak Tin Mining, Milling & Manufacturing Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1906
  5. Snow v. KimmerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1878

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

Powered by the Exa API