Cory v. Hotchkiss
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County, and from am • order denying a new trial. George E. Church, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtLennon, P. J.
The plaintiff in this action sought and recovered judgment against the defendants quieting his title to 160 acres of land situate in the county of Fresno. The defendants’ answer denied all of the material allegations of the plaintiff’s complaint, and, cross-complaining, claimed title to the lands in dispute by adverse possession, and also under a purported tax sale and deed from the county tax collector to one R. M. Barthold, which was followed by a deed from the latter to the defendant Hotchkiss alleged to have been made and executed for the benefit of Hotchkiss and the defendant Canty. The…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Bullock v. RouseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Strauss v. CantyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
3Cited by5 opinions
- Cuff v. KosloskySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1933
- Richert v. City of San DiegoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Wilkerson v. ThomasCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
- Berry v. CohnCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
- Bell v. TowneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957