Firth

Firth v. Bohrmann

Good Law
1918 Cal. App. LEXIS 340·37 Cal. App. 803·175 P. 23
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 29, 1918Civ. No. 2629.California1,023 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Shaw, J.

In this action plaintiff sought a judgment enjoining defendants from working, improving, and using a certain strip of land as and for a public road.

Judgment went for defendants. Thereafter plaintiff’s motion for a new trial was by the court denied, from which order he prosecutes this appeal.

It appears that in May, 1909, plaintiff Firth was the owner of a tract of land comprising over four, hundred acres which, under the designation of “Orange Cove,” he subdivided into lots ranging from five to eighteen acres each. Over this tract at said time there extended a meandering public road known as the Vinedale road. On May 19, 1909, there was presented to the board of supervisors a petition in due form and substance, signed by ten persons who therein represented themselves as being freeholders, and praying that said road be abandoned and vacated. After notice thereof published as provided in section 2688 of the Political Code, a hearing of the petition was had, followed by an order wherein, after reciting that evidence both oral and documentary was received touching all matters set forth in said petition, the board expressly found said petition to be true, and that “all said…

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.