Chapman v. Quinn
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, in the Nineteenth District Court, City and County of San Francisco. Wheeler, J. The facts are stated in the opinion. The action is now pending in the Supreme Court of the United States on writ of error.
1Opinion of the Court
Ross, J. :
Stripped of the mass of irrelevant and redundant matter found in the record, the case presented is this:
One Hollingsworth, it is claimed, settled on the land in controversy in 1853, as public land. He died intestate the following year, and left, surviving him, a wife and four children. The widow died intestate in 1857. The tract in dispute is *270composed of lots 4, 5, and 6 of section 36, in township 2 south, range 6, west of the Mount Diablo base and meridian. This township was surveyed, and a plat of the survey was made and approved by the United States Surveyor-General for the State…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Johnson v. TowsleySupreme Court of the United States · 1871
- Stark v. StarrsSupreme Court of the United States · 1868
- Hutchings v. LowSupreme Court of the United States · 1873
- Doll v. MeadorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- Lindsey v. HawesSupreme Court of the United States · 1863
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Horner v. EllisSupreme Court of Kansas · 1907
- Galvin v. PalmerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Newman v. Bank of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Power v. SlaMontana Supreme Court · 1900
- Plummer v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.