Legal Opinion

Crozer v. White

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 31, 1908No. Civ. No. 518PublishedCited by 4 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.

The plaintiff brought this suit to quiet her title to certain real property, of which she alleged her ownership in fee, situated in Mendocino county, embracing one hundred and t'en acres of land “and being a part of the N. W. 14 of section 18, Township 22 N., R. 12 W., M. D. B. & M.”

The defendant, W. P. White, answering the complaint, denies that plaintiff “is now, or that she was at the time of the commencement of this action, the owner in fee of all or any part of that real property” described by metes and bounds in the complaint, and sets up ownership thereof in himself, alleging “he is…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Bury v. YoungCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  2. Adams v. HopkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  3. Sparks v. HessCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
  4. Emeric v. AlvaradoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  5. Whitney v. OlneyU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Rhode Island · 1823

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Merkle v. MerkleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
  2. Hines v. CopelandCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1913
  3. Nelson v. ColtonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1918
  4. Dimond v. KellyAlaska Supreme Court · 1981

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

Powered by the Exa API