Cascaded

Cascaded v. Bortolis

Good Law
162 F. 267·3 Alaska Fed. 110
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 18, 1908No. 1,442California2,733 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hunt, J.

Upon the former hearing of this cause, judgment in defendant’s favor was reversed for error in the instructions. Cascaden v. Bartolis, 146 F. 739 , 77 C.C.A. 496 . New trial having been had, defendant again prevailed, and again plaintiffs have brought the case here.

The action was brought by John Cascaden, John Bernstein, Richard Stein, Louis K. Pratt, and Carl A. Johanson, plaintiffs in error, to recover from Joseph Bortolis, defendant in error, two certain lots in the town known as Gate City, Alaska. The complaint prayed that plaintiffs be adjudged the owners of and entitled to the possession of the lots described, and that defendant be adjudged to have no right or title thereto, and that he be removed therefrom. Plaintiffs set forth that they owned the lots as against all persons except the United States, and that in September, 1904, the defendant went upon them and withheld possession from plaintiffs, and that he has built buildings thereon and claims to own the same. The amended answer denied the allegations of ownership, and set' forth that in September, 1904, the defendant entered the land described in plaintiffs’ complaint, which was vacant, unappropriated public land.…

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.