Quinn v. Windmiller
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the county of Sacramento, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Belcher, C. C.
The plaintiff and defendant own lands which adjoin on two sides, a mile on one side and a half mile on the other. In 1872 or 1873 the plaintiff’s grantor and the defendant constructed a fence to divide their lands. This fence remained where it was placed till May, 1883, when the defendant, claiming that it was on his land and not on the true lines between them, removed a portion and asked the plaintiff to remove the balance of it. This action was then commenced by the plaintiff, to quiet his title up to the lines of the fence as it stood before any of it was removed. The case…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Sneed v. OsbornCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
- Columbet v. PachecoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
- Cooper v. VierraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
- Johnson v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
- Biggins v. ChamplinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Newport v. HattonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- Garrett v. CookCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
- Adams v. SleeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
- Peters v. De Rose GraciaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895