Brandon v. Umpqua Lumber & Timber Co.
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Mendocino County. J. Q. White, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.
The action was brought to quiet title to a certain tract of land in Mendocino County. In the answer defendant sufficiently set forth a claim of an easement by adverse user for a right of way over the land for a railroad for logging purposes in connection with a lumber business. The judgment was for plaintiff as prayed for, based upon sufficient findings which we deem unnecessary to quote.
As stated by respondent, the judgment is predicated upon three grounds: 1. That the user was permissive and never adverse; 2. That the user, conceding it to be adverse, was not for the statutory period to…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Clarke v. ClarkeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- American Co. v. BradfordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
- Evans Ditch Co. v. Lakeside Ditch Co.California Court of Appeal · 1910
3Cited by12 opinions
- O'BANION v. BorbaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
- Hester v. SawyersNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1937
- Larue v. KosichArizona Supreme Court · 1947
- Los Angeles Brick & Clay Products Co. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
- Richert v. City of San DiegoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.