Legal Opinion
Davis v. Trachsler
California Court of Appeal
Decided May 15, 1906No. Civ. No. 151PublishedCited by 5 opinions
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtBuckles, J.
This is an action to quiet title, commenced January 21, 1903. There was no demurrer. Defendants Josephine Trachsler and Prank Trachsler answered and set up their claim of interest in the land. The record does not disclose that either of the other defendants appeared at all. The judgment was against all of the defendants. Prank Trachsler and Josephine Trachsler moved for a new trial, which motion was denied, and they appeal from the order denying them a new trial. The appeal comes here on a bill of exceptions.
On July 13, 1896, the respondent was the owner of two thousand five hundred acres of…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Stetson v. BriggsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Solari v. ShowCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Mudgett v. DayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1859
- Hayes v. CampbellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
3Cited by5 opinions
- Norton v. OverholtzerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
- Barrios Co., Inc. v. J.R. Garrett Co.California Court of Appeal · 1925
- Hengehold v. National Creamery & Produce Co.California Court of Appeal · 1922
- Kerr Gifford & Co. v. American Distilling Co.California Court of Appeal · 1939
- Cottle v. CrockettCalifornia Superior Court · 1922