Smith v. Royal Ins.

Good Law
93 F.2d 143·1937 U.S. App. LEXIS 2741
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 27, 1937No. 8474California2,162 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Healy, J.

This case was before us on a former appeal, Royal Insurance Company v. Smith (C.C.A.) 77 F.2d 157 . It was there held that the demurrer to the complaint should have been sustained because of insufficient facts, and the cause was reversed with leave to the plaintiff to amend. Subsequently the plaintiff, who is appellant here, three times amended his pleading. A demurrer to his third amended complaint was sustained without leave to amend, and he appeals. *

Essentially, his third pleading alleges that in the year 1884 one Keil, his predecessor in interest, erected on the westerly shore of Belvedere cove certain structures known as Keil Cottage. These buildings were, in the main, on a strip of land which will be referred to as the first parcel. The remainder and minor part were upon a portion of lot 21, adjoining. As to the first parcel, Keil owned the title in fee, or claimed to own it. After the erection of the improvements a dispute arose between him and the Belvedere Land Company concerning the ownership of the • land. The parties composed the dispute in a written agreement which the plaintiff on information and belief alleges has been lost or destroyed. In this instrument Keil…

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.