Chapman v. Polack
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Napa County, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Searls, C.
This is an action of ejectment to recover the southeast quarter of section 13 in township 11 north, range 9 west, Mount Diablo base and meridian.
The action was brought in the county of Sonoma, transferred to the county of Napa, and there tried by the court without a jury, and judgment rendered in favor of plaintiff, from which judgment, and from an order denying a new trial, defendants appeal.
The following are the facts and conclusions of law in the cause as found by the court:—
“ FINDINGS OF FACT.
“1. At the commencement of this action, and ever since the sixteenth day of April, A.…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Robinson v. ForrestCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
- Lessee of William L. Brown and Wife, in Error v. Joseph Clements and Jonathan Hunt, in ErrorSupreme Court of the United States · 1845
- Gazzam v. Lessee of PhillipsSupreme Court of the United States · 1858
- Bates v. Illinois Central RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1862
- Polack v. GurneeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Foss v. JohnstoneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
- Weaver v. HowattCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
- John Taft Corp. v. Advisory AgencyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
- Hughes v. WheelerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Weaver v. HowattCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.