Legal Opinion

Hill v. State Box Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 5, 1952No. Civ. 8167PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SCHOTTKY, J. pro tem.

Appellants, as successors in interest of Eldon L. Cleveland, commenced an action to enjoin respondent, State Box Company, from cutting and removing timber from Section 27, T. 18 N., R. 11 E., in Nevada County, and to quiet appellants’ title to said timber.

Respondent filed an answer denying that appellants had any right to said timber and also filed a cross-complaint in which they asserted their right to said timber under a written contract entered into on June 5, 1944, between Cleveland and respondent, State Box Company.

Said agreement recited that Cleveland was the owner…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Rogers v. GruberSupreme Court of Missouri · 1943
  2. Mallett v. DohertyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
  3. McElwee v. BeckwithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
  4. Bank of New Madrid v. BullockSupreme Court of Missouri · 1944

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Drewry v. WelchCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
  2. Alamo School District v. JonesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  3. Dorado Ltd. Partnership v. Broadneck Development Corp.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1989
  4. Rossi v. HackettCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961

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

Powered by the Exa API