Legal Opinion

Thompson v. City of Los Angeles

California Supreme Court

Decided July 8, 1899No. L. A. No. 598PublishedCited by 4 opinions

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Walter Van Dyke, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

HAYNES, C.

This action is, in form, to quiet title to a narrow strip of land fronting on Soto street, in the city of Los Angeles, the plaintiffs’ right to recover depending upon the true location of the line of the street; the defendant’s contention being that the strip of land in controversy is a part of said street. Findings and judgment were for the defendant, and plaintiffs appeal from an order denying their motion for a new trial.

The notice of said motion specified,as the grounds thereof: 1. That the evidence is insufficient to justify the findings; 2. That the decision is against law;…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Brison v. BrisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Wheeler v. BoltonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  3. Estate of Westerfield v. WesterfieldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Bell v. Southern Pacific R.R. Co.California Supreme Court · 1904
  2. Bartlett v. MacKeyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
  3. Swift v. Occidental Mining & Petroleum Co.California Supreme Court · 1902
  4. People's Home Savings Bank v. RauerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1905

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

Powered by the Exa API