Helm v. Wilson
California Supreme Court
Appeal from, the judgment of the Superior Court of Mendocino County, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Belcher, C. C.
The plaintiff owns two acres of land, and the defendant one acre. The parcels are adjacent, the plaintiff’s land lying east of defendant’s. The question in the case is as to the location of the line dividing the parcels. The plaintiff claims that the line is about tweuty-two feet west of the line claimed by defendant, and he brought this action to recover from defendant possession of the disputed strip.
*478The case was tried before a jury, and the verdict and judgment were for the plaintiff. The defendant moved for a new trial, and has appealed from the judgment and order denying…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Salisbury v. ShirleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
- White v. SpreckelsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Dolde v. VodickaSupreme Court of Missouri · 1871
3Cited by30 opinions
- Price v. De ReyesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- Mello v. WeaverCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
- Martin v. LopesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
- Lewis v. OgramCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
- Loustalot v. McKeelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.