O'Connor v. Fogle
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the judgment of the Superior Court of the county of Los Angeles, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcKee, J.
This appeal is from the final judgment and order denying a motion for a new trial in this case. The action was ejectment. By the record it appears that the plaintiff claimed *10a right of entry to the demanded premises through a patent which had been issued by the State of California, April 24,1874, to the immediate grantor of the plaintiff. The patent vested in the patentee title to the land, and, as his grantee, the plaintiff was entitled to recover possession unless his cause of action was barred by the Statute of Limitations. That was the defense interposed to the action by the following…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Manly v. HowlettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
- Galland v. LewisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
- Johnson v. DykeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1862
- Beach v. GabrielCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
- Sabichi v. AguilarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
3Cited by7 opinions
- Myran v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
- In re the Estate of SbarboroCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Lapique v. MorrisonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1915
- Wilhoit v. TubbsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Baker Farming Partnership v. Nutrien Ag Solutions, Inc.District Court, E.D. California · 2022
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.