Richardson v. Butler

Good Law
1889 Cal. LEXIS 828·82 Cal. 174·23 P. 9
Supreme Court of CaliforniaDecember 23, 1889No. 12454California2,280 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

McFarland, J.

Action to quiet title. Judgment for

plaintiffs, from which and from an order denying a new trial, the defendants Kate Dunne and Alice Dunne appeal.'

Plaintiffs claim title to the disputed premises as heirs at law of their deceased father, John Sproul. Defendants claim title under a probate sale made to their grantors in the course of the administration of the estate of said Sproul, deceased, upon the petition of his administratrix, Mary Ann Sproul. The court below ruled said sale to be void; and, practically, the only question in the case is, whether or not that ruling was correct.

The court below merely found, generally, that “ said sale was void in law, and passed no title to said Moxley and Kingwell (plaintiffs’ grantors), or either of them ”; and does not find any specific facts upon which that conclusion was based. But the brief of respondents’ counsel—waiving for the present appellants’ objections to the findings for insufficiency—discloses the grounds of the finding; and the main one is, that the petition for the sale did not contain a description of the real property of the estate and a statement of its condition and *176 value, as required by section 1537 of the Gode…

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.