Wilson

Wilson v. Bittick

Good Law
1965 Cal. LEXIS 156·45 Cal. Rptr. 31·63 Cal. 2d 30·403 P.2d 159
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJune 24, 1965L. A. No. 28303California3,676 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Mosk, J.

In this action for damages for the use and occupancy of a parcel of land plaintiff appeals from a summary judgment entered in favor of defendants Bittick and Frakes. 1

This is but one more step in apparently interminable litigation begun some 13 years ago over the title to and rents or profits from a half section of unimproved farmland in Los Angeles County. The principal protagonists in this wordy drama are plaintiff and Burton A. Browne, each of whom claimed sole ownership of the disputed parcel; assuming the roles of innocent spectators are Bittick and Frakes, brothers-in-law who dry-farmed the land from 1943 to 1958 assertedly under leases from Browne and his predecessor.

The present action is the fourth to be filed in this litigation. 2 On December 3, 1952, Browne began matters by suing to quiet title to the half section of land (Los Angeles Superior Court No. 606,910). Plaintiff answered and denied Browne’s title, but on December 4, 1957, the action was dismissed for want of prosecution (Code Civ. Proc., § 583).

On December 13, 1957, Browne filed a second suit to quiet *33 title against plaintiff and others (No. 692,013). On September 8, 1958, plaintiff filed an amended…

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.