Megerle

Megerle v. Ashe

Good Law
1 Cal. Unrep. 659
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJanuary 31, 1871No. 1635California1,371 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Rhodes, J.

— On the last appeal in this action ( 33 Cal. 74 ), the only evidence of the time when the township plat was returned to the register’s office at Marysville was an unsigned indorsement: “Filed December 5, 1855, Marysville Land Office”; and as both parties regarded the plat a& having *660 been returned to that office, it was held that that indorsement was evidence — though slight — of the time when it was returned. On this appeal the record contains further evidence on that point. The parties stipulated that on the 4th of December, 1855, the surveyor general did officially transmit to the register the plat; and that on the 5th of December, 1855, the register received the plat at his office — the plaintiff reserving all legal objections as to the effect of these facts. And it was also stipulated that in February, 1856, the register and receiver at Marysville published in a newspaper, at that place, a notice to settlers in that township, requiring them to file their declaratory statements on or before the 15th of May, 1856 — the defendants reserving the right to object to the admissibility of the notice as evidence. The parties renewed their objections to the respective stipulations…

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.