Luco v. De Toro
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1DissentMcFarland, J.
I dissent from the judgment of reversal, and adhere to former opinion.
The following is the opinion above referred to by Mr. Justice" McFarland, rendered in Bank on the 27th of June, 1888: —
McFarland, J.
This is an action for the partition of the rancho mission (or ex-mission) of San Diego. There was originally a great many parties, both plaintiff and defendant, to the action; but as the interlocutory decree was satisfactory to all the parties except the plaintiff Luco and the defendant De Toro, it was stipulated that a final decree should be entered, with permission to said Luco and De Toro to…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Duff v. DuffCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Luco v. Commercial BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Oakland Gas Light Co. v. DameronCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885