Laugenour v. Hennagin
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment for the plaintiff and from an order denying a new trial in the Superior Court of the County off. Yolo. Bush, J. The action was ejectment, the plaintiff relying upon a certificate of purchase issued in pursuance of the judgments in Laugenour v. Shanklin, and Wright v. Laugenowur, cited in the opinion. The defendant claimed under an application to purchase made^pending the case last referred to.
1Opinion of the Court
The Court:
Upon the facts appearing, the right of the plaintiff to the certificate of purchase for the land in dispute, which forms a part of the five hundred thousand acre grant, is no longer open to controversy. (Wright v. Laugenour, 55 Cal. 280; Laugenour v. Shanklin, 57 id. 70.)
By Section 1925 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the certificate is made primary evidence that the holder is the owner of the land described therein.
We discover no error in the record.
Judgment and order affirmed.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Wright v. LaugenourCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
3Cited by4 opinions
- Goodwin v. McCabeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Witcher v. ConklinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Hockett v. AlstonCourt Of Appeals Of Indian Territory · 1900
- Cucamonga Fruit-Land Co. v. MoirCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890