Huling

Huling v. Seccombe

Good Law
1928 Cal. App. LEXIS 212·88 Cal. App. 238·263 P. 362
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 4, 1928Docket No. 3393.California2,214 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Thompson, J.

-This is an appeal from a decree quieting title to a certain lot situated in Long Beach, California. Appellant contends that the findings and judgment are not supported by the evidence.

Much of the evidence was stipulated. The respective parties claim title through a common ancestor. The in question is an unimproved vacant lot in a suburb of Long Beach, which has never been used, inclosed, or cultivated. It was without buildings, fences, or street improvements. The only evidence tending to show adverse possession on the part of respondent or his predecessor in title was the payment of taxes for the required length of time and the possible clearing away of weeds from the lot on one occasion. February 2, 1905, William Clague was the owner of the lot. On March 30, 1908, he executed and delivered to Emma D. Davis his promissory note for $2,700 secured by mortgage on said premises. April 14, 1910, for a valuable consideration Clague executed and delivered his deed of conveyance of said lot to John H. Warner. June 17, 1910, Warner deeded it to Henry Freedman. On the last-named date foreclosure proceedings upon said mortgage were commenced by Emma D. Davis against Clague, Freedman, and…

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.