Bode

Bode v. Trimmer

Good Law
1890 Cal. LEXIS 592·82 Cal. 513·23 P. 187
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJanuary 11, 1890No. 12262California1,229 words

Opinion

Concurring Opinion

McFarland, J.

I concur in the judgment. No proper evidence of defendant’s naturalization was offered; but I am not clear that the rule stated in the opinion of Mr. Commissioner Foote, about proof of naturalization, is entirely correct.

Lead Opinion

Foote, J.

This action was brought to determine a contest arising in the office of the surveyor-general of *515 the state of California, with respect to which of two parties had the better right to purchase certain school lands from the state. The matter was referred by the surveyor-general to the superior court of Monterey County for adjudication, under the provisions of section 3414 of the Political Code. Judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiff, as having the right to purchase the land in dispute. Pending a motion for a new trial the defendant died, and the cause was revived in the name of his administrator, and the motion was denied. From the order made in the premises and the judgment, this appeal is prosecuted.

The appellant makes the point that the eighth finding of fact is without evidence to support it; his contention being that, although it is found that previous to the filing of the application of the plaintiff to purchase the land, it had been surveyed by the surveyor-general of the United States, and the survey and p)lat duly approved was filed by him in the United States land-office, etc., that nevertheless there was no evidence of such facts in the record.

Both…

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.