Calanchini

Calanchini v. Branstetter

Good Law
1890 Cal. LEXIS 799·84 Cal. 249·24 P. 149
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJune 2, 1890No. 12627California2,029 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Belcher, J.

This is an action to enforce the specific performance of an oral agreement for the sale of laud.

The land in controversy is a strip containing about eight acres, which lies along the south side and is a part of a certain forty-acre government subdivision of land in Humboldt County.

The facts of the case, as found by the court, and undisputed, are as follows: One Baldwin owned the forty-acre tract above mentioned, and one Chamberlin owned the forty-acre tract adjoining it on the south. The line dividing their lands was undetermined and uncertain, and they disagreed as to where the true line should be located. Thereupon, in the month of July, 1882, they entered into an oral agreement that a line commencing at an agreed point on the east should be extended west through their lands, and that each owner should hold, possess, and improve up to that line; and if it should be *251 determined by a subsequent survey that the said line was not the true line dividing their respective tracts, but was too far north, then Chamberlin was to pay Baldwin the then value, in its uncleared state, of all the land lying between the temporary and the true line, or Baldwin was to pay Chamberlin the cost…

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.