Legal Opinion

Otto v. Long

California Supreme Court

Decided July 16, 1904No. Sac. No. 1076PublishedCited by 12 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Goodwin & Goodwin, and Garoutte & Goodwin, for Appellants.

1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.

This is an action to quiet title to some three hundred and twenty acres of land. The principal defense is made by the defendant John T. Long, as administrator of the estate of Allen Wood, deceased. The other defendants claim only as devisees .under the will of the said Allen Wood. Judgment was given for the plaintiff, and the appeal was taken from the judgment within sixty days after its rendition, the evidence being brought up in a bill of exceptions.

The plaintiff claims title by virtue of a sale and deed to him under a decree foreclosing a mortgage on the land, executed to the plaintiff…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Matter of the Estate Op Bernard NewManCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  2. In re the Estate of CookCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  3. In re the estate of MooreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  4. Hanley v. HanleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  5. Fealey v. FealeyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Stevens v. TorreganoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
  2. Leet v. BarrOregon Supreme Court · 1922
  3. Brown v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
  4. Estate of BetteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
  5. Estate of EffronCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1981

7 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