Legal Opinion

Howard v. Cunningham

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 9, 1918No. Civ. No. 2325PublishedCited by 3 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

BEASLY, J., pro tem.

This action arises out of a dispute over a boundary line. The plaintiff, James L. Howard, is the owner of lot 15 and eight and one-half acres off the north end of lot 18 of the Yokayo Rancho, near Ukiah, in Mendocino County, and the defendant, Ruddiek, is the owner of the remainder of lot 18, which he acquired from his codefendant, E. L. Cunningham. Plaintiff’s father formerly owned the two lots, and some years ago he conveyed to the plaintiff the land now owned by him as above stated, and the part now owned by Ruddiek he conveyed to another son, by name Mack Howard, who…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Gordon v. BookerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  2. Penry v. RichardsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1878

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Cook v. SaltzerIdaho Supreme Court · 1953
  2. Golden v. City of VallejoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
  3. Rodgers v. Roseville Gold Dredging Co.California Court of Appeal · 1955

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API