Smith v. Barrick
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Nevada County. George L. Jones, Judge. Modified and affirmed. - The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
BUCK, P. J., pro tem.
This is an action to quiet title brought by the successor in interest of an heir against the other heirs and the administrator. Plaintiff claims to have acquired ownership by adverse possession and the suit was commenced under the provisions of section 749 of the Code of Civil Procedure. But by the dismissal of the action against all of the defendants except the original heirs and the administrator, the suit has become in fact an action to quiet title. (Faxon v. All Persons, 166 Cal. 707, 712, [L. R. A. 1916B, 1209, 137 Pac. 919].) Judgment was given in favor of plaintiff…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Unger v. MooneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
- Cooley v. Miller & LuxCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- Phelps v. GradyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
- Faxon v. All PersonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
- Bath v. ValdezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Johns v. ScobieCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
- Wood v. HenleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
- Martin v. McGrathCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
- Estate of MacMillanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
- A. J. Nord v. Marvin Madison McIlroyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1961
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.