Bigelow

There was a street in the city of Los Angeles called “Negro Alley.” Plaintiff owned land which, as she *102 claimed, abutted on the westerly side of such alley, and defendant owned land adjacent to the easterly side thereof, opposite to plaintiff’s land. In April, 1889, the city council of Los Angeles vacated said alley as a street, and about the same time laid out a new street called “Los Angeles street,” a little to the west of said alley. Such new street included nearly all of plaintiff’s land, the city paying her for the portion taken. The court found that there was left, however, of her property, a wedge-shaped piece, varying in width from a few inches at the north end to a few feet at the south end, contiguous to said Negro alley, and lying between the westerly line of the alley and'the easterly line of the new street. Defendant, claiming the right, upon the vacation of the alley, to extend his frontage to the new street, constructed a small building adjacent to the east line thereof, covering a section about sixteen feet in length of the said narrow strip of plaintiff’s land, and extending eastward into what had been Negro alley. Plaintiff brought this action to quiet her…