Holladay

Holladay v. City & County of San Francisco

Good Law
124 Cal. 352·1899 Cal. LEXIS 998·57 P. 146
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMay 3, 1899S. F. No. 1298California2,346 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Britt, J.

Plaintiff claims to he the owner of a half block of land lying along the south side of Washington street, between Gough and Octavia streets, in the city and county of San Francisco, and prosecutes this action to quiet his title thereto. Said half block is parcel of the lands to which the city, early in its history, laid claim as successor of the former Mexican pueblo. On June 20, 1855, the common council of the city passed Ordinance Ho. 822—the so-called Van Hess ordinance —the second section whereof proceeded as follows: “The city of San Francisco hereby relinquishes and grants ail the right and claim of the city to the lands within the corporate limits to the parties in the actual possession thereof, by themselves or tenants, on or before the first day of January, A. D. 1855, and to their heirs and assigns forever; .... provided, such possession has been continued up to the time of the introduction of this ordinance in the common council,” etc. There were various exceptions of no present concern, and by section 4- of the ordinance the city reserved to itself “such lots *354 and lands as may be selected and reserved for streets and other public purposes under the provisions of…

Concurring Opinion

Dyke, J.

I concur in the judgment for the reason that the questions involved in this case, hy repeated decisions, both of this court and the supreme court of the United States, have become settled, and should not now be disturbed.

■Hearing in Bank denied.

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.