Legal Opinion
Van Amersfoort v. Young
California Court of Appeal
Decided June 22, 1951No. Civ. 4221PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMussell, J.
Defendants appeal from a judgment permanently enjoining them from interfering with or in any manner preventing the free and unobstructed use by plaintiffs of a roadway across the lands of defendants.
The trial court found as follows:
1. That since the month of August, 1935, the plaintiff, A. Van Amersfoort, has been and now is the owner of an 80-acre tract of land lying northerly of defendants’ land known as the ‘1 Hammond Ranch,” which is situated easterly from the town of Encinitas, San Diego County, California.
2. That at the time of the purchase of said land by plaintiff there was a well…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- O'BANION v. BorbaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
- Clarke v. ClarkeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Crockett Land & Cattle Co.California Court of Appeal · 1924
- Franz v. MendoncaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Fleming v. HowardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Miller v. JohnstonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
- MacDonald Properties, Inc. v. Bel-Air Country ClubCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
- Clark v. RedlichCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
- Zimmer v. DykstraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
- Sheeter v. LifurCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.