Alexander

Alexander v. Bosworth

Caution
1915 Cal. App. LEXIS 201·26 Cal. App. 589·147 P. 607
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 18, 1915Civ. No. 1307.California1,276 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Burnett, J.

A rehearing was granted in this case, and counsel for both parties have spared no efforts further to en-. lighten the court in reference to the vital questions involved herein. The character of the property, whether community or separate, has received special consideration and in the briefs the various decisions of the appellate courts of this state have been carefully analyzed and distinguished. We deem it necessary, however, to call specific attention to only two or three of these as there can be little question about the law, although, admittedly, some inaccurate expressions are employed in a few of the opinions.

In Hamilton v. Hubbard, 134 Cal. 605 , [ 65 Pac. 322 ], it is said: “A deed of conveyance is not merely evidence of a gift or other grant. It is the gift or grant itself, and ipso facto operates to transfer or convey the title of the property described to the grantee. (Civ. Code, secs. 1053, 1146; Shanahan v. Crampton, 92 Cal. 11, 13 , [ 28 Pac. 50 ].) . . . Under our law, a husband may make a deed—whether of his own or community property—to his wife, and in such case it is well settled that in the absence of evidence of a contrary intent, the deed will vest in her…

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.