United States v. Castro
District Court, N.D. California
The principal controversy in this case is as to the location of the dividing line between the ranchos of Mariano Castro and Jose Pena. It appears from the expediente that in February, 1841, Jose Pena presented a petition to the governor, alleging that from the year 1837 he had solicited the Rincon de San Francisquito, but that, by various proceedings, which he details, a part of it, and also an augmento he had solicited, had been conceded to other parties.
Read the full summary
The principal controversy in this case is as to the location of the dividing line between the ranchos of Mariano Castro and Jose Pena. It appears from the expediente that in February, 1841, Jose Pena presented a petition to the governor, alleging that from the year 1837 he had solicited the Rincon de San Francisquito, but that, by various proceedings, which he details, a part of it, and also an augmento he had solicited, had been conceded to other parties. He therefore prays for a new augmentation of his land "from the arroyo de las Yeguas, which is its limit, as far as the first sausal…
1Opinion of the Court
BY THE COURT.
In the foregoing description the directions referred to are approximately those indicated by actual survey, the compass marks on the diseño being, as usual, incorrect. Along the “linea del aug-mento” toward its southern end, near the hills, are written the words “Arastradero y Limites.” The part of it beyond the point where it crosses the Yeguas is inscribed “Linea del Augmento.” It is claimed that the line thus indicated is the line of the arastradero road, which, it is alleged, still exists, and can readily be traced. That that road, or a line nearly coincident with it, was…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- McCormick v. BarnumNew York Supreme Court · 1833
- Jackson ex dem. Wright v. DieffendorfNew York Supreme Court · 1808
- Jackson ex dem. Schenck v. WoodNew York Supreme Court · 1816
- Jackson ex dem. Stoutenburgh v. MurrayNew York Supreme Court · 1810
- Jackson ex dem. Van Cortlandt v. Van CorlaerNew York Supreme Court · 1814