Rourke v. McNally
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Benito County. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Temple, C.
This appeal is by plaintiff upon the judgment-roll, and appellant contends that judgment should have been fir plaintiff upon the findings.
Suit was brought to recover the possession of land, and it was tried without a jury. The court found that plaintiff on tlie fifteenth day of August, 1891, was, and long prior thereto had been, in the actual possession of the demanded premises; that plaintiff entered in the occupation of the same March 20,
1890, and enclosed the land with a wire and brush fence, which with natural harriers excluded and enclosed stock; that plaintiff did not reside…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Atherton v. FowlerSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Goodwin v. McCabeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Bullock v. RouseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- McBrown v. MorrisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
- Durand v. MartinSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Cosmos Exploration Co. v. Gray Eagle Oil Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1901
- Nash v. McNamaraNevada Supreme Court · 1908
- Brown v. KillabrewNevada Supreme Court · 1893
- Switzler v. EarnheartOregon Supreme Court · 1911
- Bradford v. DanielsenDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 1947
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.