Legal Opinion

Taylor v. McConigle

California Supreme Court

Decided February 15, 1898No. L. A. No. 248PublishedCited by 6 opinions

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the County of Ventura, and from orders denying a new trial and denying a motion to strike out a bill of costs. B. T. Williams, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtMcFARLAND, J.

This is an action to quiet title to certain land. It was brought against McConigle and others; but Mc-Conigle was the only defendant served, and there was a trial between him and plaintiff which resulted in a judgment for the defendant. Plaintiff appeals from the judgment, from an order denying his motion for a new trial, and from an order refusing to strike out defendant’s costs bill.

The premises in contest consist of a narrow strip of land running north and south parallel with the San Buena Ventura river; and the question in the case is whether, in 1860, when the final survey of the Mexican…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Smith v. StrotherCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
  2. People v. CityCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  3. James v. McCannCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Stevens v. TrumanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  2. Doll v. MaravilasCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
  3. Peoples Ditch Co. v. Foothill Irrigation DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  4. Grunsky v. FieldCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1905
  5. Neel v. RamelliCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934

1 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