Lacoste v. Eastland
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of Santa Cruz and from an order denying a new trial. James F. Breen, Acting Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcFarland, J.
This is an action to obtain partition of certain tracts of land called lots 5 and 6 of the Soquel Augmentation rancho. The plaintiffs are Jean F. Lacoste, Joseph Dazet, and Auguste F. Delmouly. Delmouly first appeared as a minor by his guardian, but he attained his majority shortly afterward, and was personally a plaintiff, at the time of the filing of the amended complaint. The defendants are Joseph Gr. Eastland and F. A. Hihn. It is averred in the complaint that Lacoste is the owner of an undivided one-eighth of the premises, Dazet the owner of an undivided fourth, Delmouly the owner of an…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Stearus v. AguirreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1857
- Kelly v. Van AustinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1861
- Junkans v. BerginCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
3Cited by7 opinions
- Farrar v. SteenberghCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- Maroney v. TannehillSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
- State Ex Rel. Caldwell v. CockrellSupreme Court of Missouri · 1919
- Weyse v. BiedebachCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
- Montgomery v. NormanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.