Anderson v. Hancock
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the county of San Bernardino, and from an order refusing a new trial. Action to quiet title. The plaintiff claimed under a tax deed. On a former appeal, a judgment in favor of the defendant was reversed, and a new trial awarded. The remaining facts sufficiently appear in the opinion.
1Per curiam
is contended by respondent that the decision of the court, on the former appeal (61 Cal. 88), that there is a sufficient description of land in the tax deed on which plaintiff and respondent relies, is a conclusive determination of the validity of the deed (so far as this action is concerned), and is “the law of the case”; that as a consequence defendant could not avail himself of any objection to the deed at the second trial which he had failed to take at the first trial.
It does not appear, either from the report of the decision on the first appeal, or from the transcript now before us, that…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Grimm v. O'ConnellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
- Hubbell v. CampbellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
- Anderson v. HancockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
3Cited by8 opinions
- Baird v. MonroeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- Trower v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
- People's Lumber Co. v. GillardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1907
- People v. HamiltonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Daly v. Ah GoonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.