Legal Opinion
Kerns v. McKean
California Supreme Court
Decided July 22, 1884No. 8,040PublishedCited by 19 opinions
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Santa Cruz County. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtThornton, J.
Action to recover possession of a parcel of land situated in the county of Santa Cruz. The defenses set up do not invoke any equity for defendant’s protection. They are purely legal, and go to the plaintiff’s claim to recover on his legal right to the possession. No equity to a specific performance of the contract referred to in the findings between Patterson and Sanford is put forth in the answer. Therefore the cases cited for respondent are not applicable.
The court rendered the following decision:—
“First—On and before the 25th day of October, 1867, W. H. Patterson was the owner of the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Emeric v. AlvaradoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
- Phelps v. Illinois Central RailroadIllinois Supreme Court · 1872
- Hegler v. EddyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1879
- Jackson ex dem. Bronck v. CryslerNew York Supreme Court · 1799
- Hunter v. OsterhoudtNew York Supreme Court · 1851
3Cited by19 opinions
- Learned v. CastleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Haynes, Admx. v. City Nat. Bank of LawtonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
- E. J. Lander & Co. v. DeemyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1920
- Gwin v. GwinIdaho Supreme Court · 1897
- National Automobile & Casualty Insurance v. AingeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.