From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pierce v. Stuart

Supreme Court of California
Jan 1, 1873
45 Cal. 280 (Cal. 1873)

Opinion

         Appeal from the District Court of the First Judicial District, County of Santa Barbara.

         The plaintiff had judgment and the defendant moved for a new trial. The motion was denied and he appealed.

         COUNSEL:

         J. H. Kincaid and A. Packard, for Appellant.

          C. E. Huse, for Respondent.


         OPINION          By the Court:

         The findings show that the grantor of the plaintiff's intestate had the actual possession of the premises in controversy, and, whilst so in possession, sold and conveyed the same to said intestate, who thereafter, and up to the time of the entry of defendants, occupied the same as pasturage for his cattle. The defendants show no title or right of entry. There was sufficient proof to sustain the findings, and we discover no error in the rulings of the Court during the progress of the trial.

         Order denying motion for a new trial affirmed.


Summaries of

Pierce v. Stuart

Supreme Court of California
Jan 1, 1873
45 Cal. 280 (Cal. 1873)
Case details for

Pierce v. Stuart

Case Details

Full title:IRA PIERCE et al., Executors of the Estate of Wm. Pierce, Deceased, v. J…

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Jan 1, 1873

Citations

45 Cal. 280 (Cal. 1873)

Citing Cases

Webber v. Clarke

         In the case of grazing land, in a grazing country, herding sheep upon it would seem to be an…

Reid v. Robrecht

As the court finds that the plaintiff was in possession of the premises at the time of the commencement of…