Russell v. Lescalet

BISHOP, J. pro tem. *

The plaintiff has appealed from the judgment, which doubly aggrieves her. First, it adjudges that she take nothing by reason of the action which she brought to have a piece of real property, 50' x 120' in size, and which we shall refer to as Lot 223, partitioned by selling, paying off some encumbrances on it, and dividing the balance between her and defendant Raleigh Lescalet. Second, it decrees: (1) that she has “no estate, right, title, lien or interest whatsoever” in Lot 223, but (2) that at the beginning of the action October 10, 1963, the title to the lot was vested…