Carr v. Quigley
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Alameda County, and from an order denying a new-trial. The action was commenced December 29, 1877, by W. B. Carr against John Quigley, to recover certain land in Alameda County, which the plaintiff claimed as grantee under a patent issued to the Central Pacific Railroad Company February 28, 1874. This patent was in confirmation of the grant of lands made by the acts of July 1, 1862, and July 2, 1864, to the Western Pacific…
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Alameda County, and from an order denying a new-trial. The action was commenced December 29, 1877, by W. B. Carr against John Quigley, to recover certain land in Alameda County, which the plaintiff claimed as grantee under a patent issued to the Central Pacific Railroad Company February 28, 1874. This patent was in confirmation of the grant of lands made by the acts of July 1, 1862, and July 2, 1864, to the Western Pacific Railroad Company, the predecessor in interest of the Central Pacific Railroad Company, and recites the exception of lands…
1Opinion of the CourtThornton, J.
We regard the contention of appellant, Carr, in this case as settled by the decision of the supreme court of the United States in Doolan v. Carr, 125 U. S. 618, and by the decisions of this court made prior to the judgment in Doolan v. Carr, viz., Carr v. Quigley, 57 Cal. 394, and McLaughlin v. Heid, 63 Cal. 208.)
*132The same points were presented in Doolan v. Carr that are presented in this case, and with reference to the same Mexican grant of Las Pocitas. The only difference is, that in Doolan v. Carr the points arose and were presented on an offer of testimony, and here they arise on the proof…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Doolan v. CarrSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Carr v. QuigleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
- McLaughlin v. HeidCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883