Harlan v. Schulze
California Court of Appeal
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtChipman, P. J.
Action to quiet title. The land in controversy is a certain lot situated in the town of Dixon, Solano county. The complaint is in the ordinary form of an action to quiet title. Defendant denies the averments of the complaint and avers that at the time the action was commenced he was the owner ip. fee of the premises. It is further averred that on November 3, 1904, one Josephine Quick was the owner of the land, and on that day conveyed the same to Albert Manning, who on November 9, 1904, conveyed the same to defendant. The answer then sets forth that plaintiff claims title through a deed dated…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Beronio v. Ventura County Lumber Co.California Supreme Court · 1900
- Rosenblum v. LevyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Heathman v. HolmesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Simonson v. BurrCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- Laughlin v. WrightCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Ryan v. ColburnSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1932
- Bullis v. StanifordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
- Hohn v. PaulyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1909
- Coca Cola Bottling Co. v. FelicianoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
- Lee on v. LongCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.