Gross

Williams v. Gross

Good Law
1900 Cal. LEXIS 1073·6 Cal. Unrep. 477·61 P. 934
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJuly 19, 1900Sac. No. 621California1,007 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Gray, J.

In a suit to quiet title the defendant had judgment, and the plaintiff appeals to this court from said judgment and from an order denying him a new trial.

Two separate causes of action are stated in the complaint. The second cause of action as stated is to quiet plaintiff’s title to all that portion of the north extension of the Marryatt quartz mining claim which lies north and east of what was formerly the old county road leading from the present county road at Swerer’s store, in. Tuttletown, over the hill, to the present county road, at a point near the old Patterson millsite. Said property is situated in Tuolumne county. Plaintiff and his grantor claim title to that portion of the north extension of the Marryatt quartz mining claim above described, by adverse possession of thirteen years immediately preceding the commencement of the action, and allege that they have paid the taxes thereon all during that period. The complaint further alleges in the second count that, for more than eight years prior to the commencement of the action, plaintiff and his grantor have been owners, and that plaintiff now is the owner, of the said premises. It is upon this second cause of action that…

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.