Patton v. City of Los Angeles
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.
The plaintiffs have appealed from the judgment.
The city of Los Angeles was not named as a defendant in the complaint. It was, however, substituted as defendant instead of the city of Wilmington. Thereupon the action was dismissed as to all the other defendants. The action proceeded as an action between the plaintiffs and the city of Los Angeles as the sole defendant, the city filed an answer, and upon these pleadings the trial took place.
The complaint states a cause of action to quiet title to a tract of land, a part of which lies within the bay of San Pedro, containing about seven acres,…
2Cases cited34 opinions
- People v. California Fish Co.California Supreme Court · 1913
- Knoxville Water Co. v. KnoxvilleSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
- Archer v. Salinas CityCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- City of Oakland v. Oakland Water Front Co.California Supreme Court · 1897
- Arrington v. LiscomCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- Michaelson v. Silver Beach Improvement Ass'n, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1961
- Friends of the Trails v. BlasiusCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
- State of California Ex Rel. State Lands Commission v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
- City of Newport Beach v. FagerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
- People v. HeckerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.