McDonough

McDonough v. Cooper

Good Law
179 Cal. 384·1918 Cal. LEXIS 764·177 P. 153
Supreme Court of CaliforniaDecember 10, 1918Sac. No. 2736.California867 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Sloss, J.

Action to quiet title to two parcels of land in the city of Modesto. The court gave judgment declaring defendant, Ida B. Cooper, to be the owner of the property. The plaintiff appeals from the judgment.

The plaintiff deraigned title from the United States. The defendant, Cooper, claimed under a deed following a sale for nonpayment of an assessment levied by the Modesto Irrigation District for the year 1905.

Section 48 of the act under which the sale was had makes the collector’s deed, duly acknowledged and proved, prima facie evidence that the proceedings were regular in seven specified particulars, and then declares that such deed is conclusive evidence of “the regularity of all the proceedings from the assessment by the assessor, inclusive, up to the execution of the deed.” (Stats. 1897, p. 271.) This conclusive evidence clause differs from section 3787 of the Political Code in that it does not qualify the word “proceedings” by the word “other.” Nevertheless, we do not doubt that, as was intimated in Escondido H. S. Dist. v. Escondido Seminary, 130 Cal. 128, 133 , [ 62 Pac. 401 ], and held in Bruschi v. Cooper, 30 Cal. App. 682, 692 , [ 159 Pac. 728, 734 ], the legislative…

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.