Legal Opinion

Young v. Blakeman

California Supreme Court

Decided April 29, 1908No. S.F. No. 4213PublishedCited by 57 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.

This is an action to recover possession of land and involves the location of the boundaries between the respective lots of the plaintiff and defendant, situated in San Francisco. The plaintiff appeals from the judgment and from an order denying his motion for a new trial.

The two principal points urged by the plaintiff are, 1. That where adjoining owners have agreed upon and established a division line, a subsequent deed by one of them purporting to convey his tract by the original description, will not convey the title to the grantee up to the agreed line, if it turns out that the position of…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Sneed v. OsbornCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
  2. Lewis v. OgramCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
  3. Blakeman v. MillerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
  4. White v. SpreckelsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  5. Miles v. BarrowsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877

3Cited by57 opinions

  1. Ernie v. Trinity Lutheran ChurchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
  2. Price v. De ReyesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
  3. Clapp v. ChurchillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
  4. Beeson v. SchlossCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  5. Mello v. WeaverCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950

52 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