Legal Opinion

United States v. Southern Pac. R.

District Court, S.D. California

Decided March 3, 1926No. 97PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JAMES, District Judge.

This is an action in equity to cancel a patent to land described as section 13 in township 11 north, range 6 east S. B. B.- & M. Damages are also prayed for. Patent was issued to Southern Pacific Railroad Company pursuant to the provisions of the act of grant of July 27, 1866 (14 Stat. 292). The Southern Pacific Land Company holds legal title to the land covered by the patent. The land company is of the same ownership as the Southern Pacific Railroad Company, acts as a subsidiary of the -former, and occupies no position in this action which would entitle it to assert any…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Chrisman v. MillerSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
  2. Exploration Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
  3. Diamond Coal & Coke Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
  4. United States v. Diamond Coal & Coke Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1921
  5. United States v. Bellingham Bay Improvement Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1922

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. United States v. Standard Oil Company of CaliforniaDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1937
  2. United States v. MobleyDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1942
  3. United States v. ChristopherCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1934
  4. Bryan v. United StatesDistrict Court, N.D. Oklahoma · 1938
  5. Ball v. NC Red Rock LLCDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 2024

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API