Gird v. Ray
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Seventh District. Ejectment for one hundred and sixty acres of land, plaintiff claiming under the Possessory Act of 1852. Answer, a general denial. On the trial, plaintiff introduced in evidence his affidavit, filed Jan. 3d, 1860, in accordance with the act.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Seventh District. Ejectment for one hundred and sixty acres of land, plaintiff claiming under the Possessory Act of 1852. Answer, a general denial. On the trial, plaintiff introduced in evidence his affidavit, filed Jan. 3d, 1860, in accordance with the act. He then proved by a witness that the boundaries of the land embraced in the affidavit—being the tract in dispute—were marked out by blazing trees at short distances, driving stakes and piling up rocks, so that the lines could be readily traced; that one acre of this tract was inclosed and planted in vines and fruit trees,…
1Opinion of the CourtCope, J.
Field, C. J. concurring.
The act prescribing the mode of maintaining and defending possessory actions (Wood’s Dig. 526) was intended for the benefit of actual settlers. The plaintiff failed to show that he ever resided upon the land claimed by him under the provisions of that act. The suit was brought more than four months after the location of the claim, and whatever his rights may have been during the period allowed for putting improvements upon the premises, they were lost at the expiration of that period by reason of his non-residence. If his claim had been perfected by an actual residence *354…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Wolfskill v. MalajowichCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870