Sheehy v. True
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the. District Court of the Seventh Judicial District, County of Napa. Ejectment to recover about sixty acres of land, being a portion of the southwest quarter of section thirty-six, township five north, range four west, Mount Diablo meridian.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the. District Court of the Seventh Judicial District, County of Napa. Ejectment to recover about sixty acres of land, being a portion of the southwest quarter of section thirty-six, township five north, range four west, Mount Diablo meridian. The defendant set up as an equitable defense that the demanded premises were a portion of the “Suscol Eancho,” and that, at the date of the passage of the Act of Congress of March 3d, 1863, and at the time of the rejection of Vallejo’s claim thereto by the Supreme Court of the United States, he was in the possession of the demanded premises,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court:
The equitable defense interposed by the defendant cannot be supported. The Act of Congress commonly called “ the Suscol Act,” afforded the defendant (as being a bona fide purchaser from General Vallejo, and in possession anterior to the rejection of the Vallejo claim,) a mere privilege of acquiring the title from the United States. This privilege, however, he rejected and utterly repudiated. He took no step whatever to acquire the title. Having under the terms of the Act the opportunity to unite with the plaintiffs in proceedings to acquire the title of the United States, he…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Sheldon v. MullCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
- Lake v. LakeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1877