Lick v. Diaz
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, Fourth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco. The defendants, who moved for a new trial, appealed. The other facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Curbey, C. J.:
The plaintiff claiming to be the owner and in the possession of Fifty-vara Lot Ho. 17, in the City of San Francisco, brought his action on the 5th of July, 1864, against the defendants, having for its object, first, to obtain a decree to enjoin and restrain the heirs of Juan Prado Mesa, deceased, from further prosecuting a certain action by them brought against the plaintiff for the partition of said lot in which they claimed the undivided half of it; second, that the plaintiff be adjudged *67and decreed to be the lawful owner of the premises as against the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- De Merle v. MathewsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
3Cited by6 opinions
- De Frieze v. QuintCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Emerson v. Yosemite Gold Mining & Milling Co.California Supreme Court · 1906
- Acton v. CulbertsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
- Lick v. DiazCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
- Paine v. ComstockWisconsin Supreme Court · 1883
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.