Chapman v. Hollister
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Seventeenth Judicial District, County of San Diego. This was an action of ejectment for a lot known as .the Pear Garden of Lorenzo Soto, in the old City of San Diego. Defendant Hollister disclaimed any interest. Defendant Wallace filed a general denial, and set up the Statute of Limitations. There was a judgment for defendant Wallace; and a motion for new trial having been overruled, plaintiff appealed.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Crockett, J.:
The first point for consideration is, whether the plaintiff is entitled to the possession of the demanded premises on his own theory of the facts. Both parties claim through the will of Lorenzo Soto, deceased, which was duly probated, and of which the widow of Soto was appointed and duly qualified as executrix. Whilst acting as executrix, the widow contracted a second marriage, and subsequently, by the joint deed of herself and husband, conveyed said premises to the plaintiff, who insists that the property was devised to the widow by Soto’s will, and that her…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Beckett v. SeloverCalifornia Supreme Court · 1857
- In re Estate of WoodworthCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
- Meeks v. HahnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1862
- Updegraff v. TraskCalifornia Supreme Court · 1861
3Cited by8 opinions
- Lamme v. DodsonMontana Supreme Court · 1883
- Crosby v. DowdCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
- Meeks v. VassaultU.S. Circuit Court for the District of California · 1874
- Personette v. JohnsonNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1885
- Plass v. PlassCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.