Kingsbury
Kingsbury v. Tevco, Inc.
Opinion
Opinion
Regan, J.
The trial court sustained, without leave to amend, a general demurrer to plaintiff’s first amended complaint.
The complaint is based upon an alleged erroneous survey made pursuant to the order of the court and “the agreement of the parties” by Tevco, acting by and through defendant Roecker, in a previous action in superior court captioned Russell R. Ford v. Emma J. Kingsbuiy, No. 210857, seeking an injunction against plaintiff here and involving a boundary line dispute. The court, after a trial, rendered judgment that the Tevco survey was true and correct and marked the boundary line between the litigants contiguous lands. The judgment enjoined plaintiff Kingsbuiy from encroaching on the Ford land.
In the action before us on appeal, one of the allegations in the complaint is that at the time Arthur Roecker was making the survey for the court in the earlier bbundary dispute case plaintiff herein “verbally informed him of the error he was making . . . but the said Arthur Roecker refused to change his survey . . . and verbally advised plaintiff that his concern was to make a survey according to the wishes of defendant Russell R. Ford.”