Kreske

Kreske v. Eyman

Good Law
1969 Cal. App. LEXIS 1706·269 Cal. App. 2d 840·75 Cal. Rptr. 392
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 19, 1969Civ. No. 24584California1,469 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Shoemaker, J.

Plaintiff Frank Kreske brought this action to quiet his title to an easement over certain real property in the possession and use of defendants. Defendants J. R. Eyman and Allan Fuller, sued both individually and as the *841 business entity of Fuller and Eyman, answered, denying .that plaintiff was the owner of the easement and asserting several affirmative defenses.

After a nonjury trial, the court found that plaintiff was not the owner of the easement described in the complaint, and disposed of the affirmative defenses adverse to defendants. The court concluded as a matter of law that defendants were entitled to judgment against plaintiff and that plaintiff should take nothing by his complaint to quiet title. Judgment was accordingly entered, and plaintiff appeals.

Although the court made no probative factual findings indicating the basis for its ultimate finding that plaintiff was not the owner of the easement described in the complaint, the court did render a memorandum opinion in which it pointed out that plaintiff had derived his title to the alleged easement through one Abrott, who in turn had taken by a 1919 conveyance from the Danville Water Company, a public utility…

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.