Jones v. Singleton
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Sixth Judicial District, Sacramento County. This was an action to recover possession of lot number one, in the block bounded by K and L and Fifth and Sixth streets, in the City of Sacramento.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the Sixth Judicial District, Sacramento County. This was an action to recover possession of lot number one, in the block bounded by K and L and Fifth and Sixth streets, in the City of Sacramento. The plaintiff claimed title under a deed alleged to have been made by Sutter, Jr., to Brannan, Bruce, Graham, and Wetzlar, on the 20th of June, 1850. To rebut this title the defendants allege, among other things, that pripr to June 1st, 1849, Sutter, Jr., by Burnett, who was his attorney in fact for the sale of town lots in Sacramento, sold the premises in…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court:
The application for a new trial was granted upon the ground of newly discovered evidence. It appears that after the trial of the cause the defendants discovered for the first time that the promissory note of Holman to John A. Sutter, Jr., bearing date June 10th, 1849, was in existence. It had been proven at the trial that the uniform habit of the agent of Sutter, in selling lots in Sacramento City, was to give a bond for a conveyance when any part of the purchase money was unpaid, and assuming it to be the fact that such was his uniform practice, the discovery of the Holman note…
2Cited by8 opinions
- People v. SuttonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Heintz v. CooperCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Oberlander v. Fixen & Co.California Supreme Court · 1900
- People v. HewittCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
- People v. RamosCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.