Legal Opinion

Hibberd v. McCosker

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 7, 1921No. Civ. Nos. 4009, 4010PublishedCited by 4 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtTyler, P. J.

These actions, which were consolidated and tried together upon the same evidence, were brought to determine ownership and possession of a certain tract of land consisting of eighty acres. The first action was one to _m.net ti+le, plaintiff alleging ownership and possession in herself and a wrongful claim to the same by defendant. The second action was a suit for possession of the land, wherein title was claimed by plaintiff and alleged wrongful possession by defendant.

At the trial plaintiff proved title by record based upon a United States patent. Defendant’s claim of ownership and right to…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Church v. WaggonerTexas Supreme Court · 1890
  2. De Frieze v. QuintCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  3. Mauldin v. CoxCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
  4. Hamilton v. FluornoyOregon Supreme Court · 1903
  5. Urquide v. FlanaganIdaho Supreme Court · 1900

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Clark v. RedlichCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
  2. Wood v. DavidsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
  3. Phelan v. DrescherCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
  4. Furtado v. TaylorCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948

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

Powered by the Exa API