Petitpierre

Petitpierre v. Maguire

Good Law
155 Cal. 242·1909 Cal. LEXIS 420·100 P. 690
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 25, 1909S.F. No. 5006.California3,308 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Angellotti, J.

This is an appeal by plaintiff from a judgment and order denying a new trial, in an action brought by her to quiet her title to a lot of land in the city and county of San Francisco.

The material facts of the case can be more easily understood with the aid of the following diagram:—-

The land in controversy is the strip thirty-five by one hundred feet marked “A” on this diagram. On August 16, 1860, Blihu F. Baldwin was the owner of the portions of block 69 marked A, B, C, and D, a parcel fronting two hundred and seventy-five feet on Van Ness Avenue, with a uniform depth of one hundred and forty-eight feet on Hayes and Fell streets, and was then residing on the same with his wife and daughter. On that day, he and his wife duly selected the said property as a homestead, in the manner required by law. On November 18, 1863, Baldwin and his wife, by a deed duly executed and acknowledged by both of them and duly recorded, sold and conveyed to one Bartlett the portion marked “D,” and this deed contained the following provision: “with the understanding that whenever Linden Avenue, a street thirty-five (35) feet wide, running east and west through the center of block No. 69 is opened for…

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.