Legal Opinion

Booth v. Hoskins

California Supreme Court

Decided March 20, 1888No. 12383PublishedCited by 59 opinions

Appeal from, a judgment of the Superior Court of Placer County, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

Belcher, C. C.

—The plaintiffs commenced this action on the twenty-ninth day of July, 1885, to quiet their title to a quarter-section of land in Placer County. By his answer, the defendant denied that the plaintiffs, or either of them, had owned the land in question since the thirteenth day of July, 1878, admitted that he claimed to own it, and by way of cross-complaint al*272leged that, on the thirteenth day of July, 1878, the plaintiff Booth was the sole owner of the land, and on that day, for and in consideration of the sum of $408, gold coin, paid to him by defendant, executed and delivered to…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Moss v. WarnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
  2. Farmer v. GroseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
  3. Montgomery v. SpectCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
  4. Sargent v. WilsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1855
  5. Mabury v. RuizCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881

3Cited by59 opinions

  1. Riverisland Cold Storage, Inc. v. Fresno-Madera Production Credit Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 2013
  2. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n v. PendergrassCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Spect v. SpectCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  4. Faxon v. All PersonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
  5. Burns v. HiattCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906

54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API