Page v. Fowler
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth District, City and County of San Francisco. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtTemple, J.
The main facts of this case are almost precisely the same as in Page v. Fowler (28 Cal. 605 and 37 Cal. 100.)
The plaintiff was in possession of about eight hundred acres of land, which had been inclosed for many years, and which he claimed to own under the so-called Suscol grant. In the summer of 1862, while crops put in by plaintiff were still growing upon the land, the defendants entered, claiming one hundred and sixty acres of land each, as pre - emptioners. They built small houses upon their respective claims, where they afterwards lived. They each possessed the requisite qualifications…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Halleck v. MixerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- Suydam v. Jenkins, SheriffThe Superior Court of New York City · 1850
- Clark & Clark v. PinneyNew York Supreme Court · 1827
- Page v. FowlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
- Romaine v. . Van AllenNew York Court of Appeals · 1863
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by60 opinions
- In re RoseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Meeker v. GardellaWashington Supreme Court · 1890
- Churchill v. AckermanWashington Supreme Court · 1900
- Ingram v. RankinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1879
- Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n v. Angelus Cloak Co.California Court of Appeal · 1932
55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.