Boreham

Boreham v. Byrne

Good Law
1890 Cal. LEXIS 632·83 Cal. 23·23 P. 212
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 1, 1890No. 13222California1,671 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Thornton, J.

Ejectment; tried by a jury. Verdict and judgment for- defendants. Plaintiffs appeal from the judgment, and order denying their motion for a new trial.

On October 14, 1862, one Mee, who at that time held the title to the land in suit, conveyed it to George Bore-ham, husband of plaintiff, Louise Boreham. It wras admitted that, from the day the foregoing deed bears date, up to the time George Boreham left San Bernardino, about July 1, 1865, he and his family resided on the land sued for.

Defendants claim title under a deed purporting to be executed by George Boreham and plaintiff Louise Bore-ham, his wife, to J. H. Stewart, dated May 31, 1865. “ It was offered by defendants as the deed of George *25 Boreham only.” Whatever title Stewart took by this deed passed to and vested in the defendants.

On the trial plaintiffs offered in evidence a certified copy of a paper executed by George Boreham on November 4, 1862, which was duly acknowledged and recorded on the day just above named. The following is a copy of it:—

Defendants objected to the introduction of the foregoing paper, on the grounds that it was not a declaration of homestead; that it was immaterial, irrelevant, and…

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.