Phillips v. Lowrey
California Supreme Court
Appeal from an order denying a new trial, in the Nineteenth District Court, City and County of San Francisco. Wheeler, J. The questions in the case were: 1st, whether the land in controversy was included in a certain deed of conveyance from one Bernal, under which the plaintiff deraigned title; 2nd, if included, whether her title was divested by a judgment in a partition suit, to which she was a party; and 3rd, whether the land in controversy was included in a deed executed…
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order denying a new trial, in the Nineteenth District Court, City and County of San Francisco. Wheeler, J. The questions in the case were: 1st, whether the land in controversy was included in a certain deed of conveyance from one Bernal, under which the plaintiff deraigned title; 2nd, if included, whether her title was divested by a judgment in a partition suit, to which she was a party; and 3rd, whether the land in controversy was included in a deed executed by her to her father prior to the commencement of the action. The Court found that the land in controversy was included…
1Opinion of the Court
Department No. 1, by the Court (from the Bench):
The point suggested is, that the Court below must have construed the description of the land contained in certain deeds improperly. As the record comes here, that question cannot be considered.
The appeal is from an order denying a new trial, and there is no specification of any deficiency in the evidence to sustain the findings of the Court below. There is no appeal from the judgment, and construing the description in the deeds as is contended for by counsel for appellant, non constat, but the Court below held that the tract of land sued for was…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Preston v. HearstCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
- McNish v. WolvenSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1909