Helm

Newport Bay Dredging Co. v. Helm

Good Law
120 Cal. App. 127·1932 Cal. App. LEXIS 88·7 P.2d 1039
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 22, 1932Docket No. 624.California1,631 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Lambert, J.

The plaintiff and appellant Newport Bay Dredging Company, a corporation, instituted an action against the defendant and respondent Glen Helm for the restitution of certain premises situated on Newport Bay and for damages for withholding possession for more than three years. The respondent, in addition to an answer denying the allegations of the complaint, filed a cross-complaint setting forth two causes of action. In the first cause of action he pleaded title by adverse possession and in the second cause of action he alleged that the plaintiff had deeded all of its right, title and interest" in and to the premises to respondent. There was a failure of proof on the first cause of action set forth in the cross-complaint but the court gave the respondent judgment on the second cause of action decreeing him to be the owner of the premises which are the subject of this controversy. The court made findings of fact and conclusions of law responsive to the pleadings. The facts developed by the evidence appear in the court’s finding number 10 hereinafter set forth. The appellant brings this appeal under the provisions of section 953a of the Code of Civil Procedure, and brings up a…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.