Legal Opinion

Ross v. Lawrence

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 12, 1963No. Civ. 7078PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCoughlin, J.

The sole issue on this appeal is whether ■the evidence supports the finding of the trial court that an easement had been extinguished by adverse use.

■ The plaintiffs, appellants herein, brought this action to restrain the defendants, the respondents herein, from interfering with the former’s use of an easement for ingress and egress over the latter’s property, which consists of two parcels. The defendants cross-complained and asked the court to quiet their title to the property in question.

The plaintiffs and the defendants, respectively, are the owners of property divided by the center line…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Teel v. GaskillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  2. O'BANION v. BorbaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  3. Glatts v. HensonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  4. Fomco, Inc. v. Joe Maggio, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1961
  5. Clark v. RedlichCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Gerhard v. StephensCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  2. Guerra v. PackardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
  3. Zimmer v. DykstraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
  4. Kerr Land & Timber Co. v. EmmersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
  5. Vieira Enterprises, Inc. v. McCoyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017

3 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