Legal Opinion

Serrano v. Grissom

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 20, 1963No. Civ. 164PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStone, J.

Appellants filed this quiet title action for the purpose of preventing respondents’ use of a roadway. Respondents cross-complained, alleging a right of way by prescription, and prevailed in the trial court.

Appellants are husband and wife, as are respondents. For convenience the parties will hereinafter be referred to in the singular.

Appellant and respondent own adjoining parcels of farm land with a common line forming appellant’s south boundary and respondent’s north boundary. Before either party owned his respective parcel, a rough roadway consisting of wheel tracks ran across the southeast…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. O'BANION v. BorbaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  2. Clarke v. ClarkeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
  3. Dooling v. DabelCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
  4. Vargas v. MaderosCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
  5. Van Amersfoort v. YoungCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. O'DELL v. StegallWest Virginia Supreme Court · 2010
  2. Guerra v. PackardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
  3. Zimmer v. DykstraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
  4. Pittman v. LowtherSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2005
  5. Popovich v. O'NealCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963

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

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

Powered by the Exa API