Legal Opinion

Pacific Mutual Life Insurance v. Stroup

California Supreme Court

Decided February 13, 1883PublishedCited by 11 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the late District Court of the county of El Dorado, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of Me. Justice McKee.

1Opinion of the CourtMcKee, J.

This was an action in ejectment. The demanded premises are a portion of the southwest quarter of section sixteen, township ten, range eight east, of Mount Diablo meridian, for which and other parcels of real property the State of California, on the 22d of April, 1867, issued a patent to B. N. Bugbey. For several years before this patent was issued Bugbey and the defendant Stroup, adversely to each other, occupied separate portions of the quarter section, a picket fence constituting the division line between their claims. And, being in *151possession, on the 24th of July, 1866, they made and…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. McCracken v. City of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
  2. Arrington v. LiscomCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
  3. Cannon v. StockmonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
  4. Tewksbury v. MagraffCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
  5. Thompson v. PiocheCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Follette v. Pacific Light & Power Corp.California Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Rennert v. ShirkIndiana Supreme Court · 1904
  3. Meyer v. HopeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1898
  4. Davis v. McGrewCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  5. Labonte v. DavidsonIdaho Supreme Court · 1918

6 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