Alcorn v. Buschke
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
SMITH, C.
—The appeal is from a judgment for the defendants on demurrer to the complaint, the plaintiffs declining to amend. The suit was to quiet plaintiffs’ title to the west half of the northwest quarter of section 34, township 2 south, range 5 east, Mount Diablo base and meridian, situate in the county of San Joaquin; and to recover possession of the same.
The plaintiffs deraign title, as to two thirds of-the land in question, as heirs of one McKinney, who died seised of this and other lands, April 8, 1893, and as to the other third, under a deed from one Sebree, the remaining heir, of date…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Frink v. RoeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Eversdon v. MayhewCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
- Billings v. MorrowCalifornia Supreme Court · 1857
- Wilhoit v. LyonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Randall v. DuffCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Bell v. PleasantCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Shields v. ShieldsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
- Gates Rubber Co. v. UlmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1989
- First Fidelity Thrift & Loan Ass'n v. ALLIANCE BK.California Court of Appeal · 1998
- Bertelsen v. BertelsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.