Copp v. Harrington
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, Sixth Judicial District, County of Yolo. The land in controversy was the, northwest quarter of the southeast quarter and the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of section 10, T. 12 N., E. 1 W., Mount Diablo meridan, lying in Yolo County. The plaintiff entered into possession of it in 1859, and remained in possession, cultivating and improving it, up to the time of the trial of this cause.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court, Sixth Judicial District, County of Yolo. The land in controversy was the, northwest quarter of the southeast quarter and the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of section 10, T. 12 N., E. 1 W., Mount Diablo meridan, lying in Yolo County. The plaintiff entered into possession of it in 1859, and remained in possession, cultivating and improving it, up to the time of the trial of this cause. The defendant was a resident of San Francisco, and in December, 1869, made the following application to purchase the land: “Grant of the 16th and 36th…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Rhodes, J.:
The lands in controversy are subdivisions of section 10, township 12 north, range 1 west, and both parties seek to purchase them in lieu of subdivisions of certain sixteenth sections. The defendant’s application was filed in the Surveyor’s-General’s office in December, 1869. The plaintiff’s application was filed on the thirtieth of April, 1870. The defendant’s application was defective, for the reason, among others, that it failed to state that there .were “ no improvements of any kind on said land, other than those of the applicant,” as required by the fifty-third…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hildebrand v. StewartCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
3Cited by3 opinions
- People ex rel. Eadie v. Noyo Lumber Co.California Supreme Court · 1893
- Rooker v. JohnstonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
- Rowell v. PerkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880