Burke

Burke v. Bours

Good Law
1891 Cal. LEXIS 1281·3 Cal. Unrep. 393·26 P. 102
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMarch 9, 1891No. 13,912California1,706 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Foote, J.

This action in ejectment was instituted to re cover certain real property in the city of Stockton. The cause has been here before ( 67 Cal. 447 , 8 Pac. 49 ), and it was then decided, among other things, that a certain deed made by one Arguello (whose wife’s administrator is now the plaintiff here) to Bours, the defendant, was void and of no effect to convey title from Arguello, because at the time it was executed and acknowledged the name of Bours, the intending purchaser, was not inserted in the deed, and that instrument was a blank as to any grantee. The defendant in possession set up, in defense to the apparent legal title of the plaintiff, facts which were claimed to constitute a perfect equitable title in the former. The court below, by its findings and decision, coincided with the defendant, and rendered judgment that the plaintiff take nothing by his action, and that the defendant recover costs. From that judgment this appeal is taken upon the judgment-roll, and a bill of exceptions showing such of the evidence as is necessary, upon which is based the findings and decision which are attacked. It seems to be conceded by all the contestants that the property in dispute was…

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.