Knowles v. Crocker Estate Co.
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Morrison & Cope, W. I. Brobeck, and George C. Ross, for Appellants.
1Opinion of the CourtLorigan, J.
This action was for forcible entry. Judgment was rendered in favor of plaintiff for a restitution of the land described in the complaint and for treble the amount of damages awarded by the jury, and from such judgment and an order denying the motion of defendants for a new trial this appeal has been taken.
The evidence shows that the land described in the complaint is a portion of a larger tract of about thirty-three acres in extent in San Mateo County, with a fence on the outside and with cross-fences thereon, which at the dates hereafter mentioned was in the occupancy of one Daly, as tenant…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Brumagim v. BradshawCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870
- Shelby v. HoustonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
- Ely v. YoreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- People v. EckertCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- Gray v. CollinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Jordan v. TalbotCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
- Davis v. CrumpCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Martin v. CassidyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
- Dennison v. ClaiborneSupreme Court of Alabama · 1972
- People v. WillCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.