Brooks v. Calderwood
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, Twelfth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco. The trial was by the Court without a jury.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court, Twelfth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco. The trial was by the Court without a jury. It appeared, from a statement on this appeal, that plaintiff came into possession of a portion of the lands claimed by plaintiff, under a writ of restitution issued on a judgment in an action of ejectment by plaintiff against one Boss, which fact, together with the judgment roll in that action, was put in evidence by plaintiff on the trial of this cause, under appellants’ objection and exception for irrelevancy. Plaintiff, in his proof, deraigned title to the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Sawyer, C. J.:
This is >an action brought under section two hundred fifty-four of the Practice Act to determine an adverse claim to Subdivisions Twenty-eight, Thirty-one and Forty of One Hundred-vara Lot Humber Seven, in the City of San Fran*565cisco. The plaintiff alleges title and possession; that defendants set up some adverse claim, estate or interest which has no just foundation in law or equity; that such claim, although invalid, is a cloud upon his title, impairs the market value of the property and obstructs its alienation; and that one of the defendants is harrassing him by…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Lyle v. RollinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
- Knowles v. InchesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1859
3Cited by18 opinions
- Castro v. BarryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Nev. Cty. & Sacramento Canal Co. v. KiddCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
- Kittle v. BellegardeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Wolf v. GallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- Calderwood v. PeyserCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.