Donley v. West

California Court of Appeal

Donley v. West

49 Cal. App. 796

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedSeptember 28, 1920

DocketCiv. No. 3171

StatusPublished

This text of 49 Cal. App. 796 (Donley v. West) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Donley v. West, 49 Cal. App. 796 (Cal. Ct. App. 1920).

Pincite

Opinion

THE COURT.

At the oral argument following the order granting a rehearing it was stipulated by the parties hereto that all proceedings in the Land Department affecting the respective rights of the parties, as shown by the records of [797]*797that department, are correctly set forth in the record on appeal in Donley v. Van Horn (No. 3213), ante, p. 383, [193 Pac. 514], and that on the appeal in this case judicial notice might be taken of all the records of the Land Department so set forth in the record in the Van Horn appeal. The effect of that stipulation is to show that, mutatis mutandis, the facts in this case are, in all substantial respects, the same as in the Van Horn case. For the reasons stated in the opinion this day filed in Donley v. Van Horn, the judgment is reversed.

A petition to have the cause heard in the supreme court, after judgment in the district court of appeal, was denied by the supreme court on November 24, 1920.

All the Justices concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

THE COURT.

At the oral argument following the order granting a rehearing it was stipulated by the parties hereto that all proceedings in the Land Department affecting the respective rights of the parties, as shown by the records of [797]*797that department, are correctly set forth in the record on appeal in Donley v. Van Horn (No. 3213), ante, p. 383, [193 Pac. 514], and that on the appeal in this case judicial notice might be taken of all the records of the Land Department so set forth in the record in the Van Horn appeal. The effect of that stipulation is to show that, mutatis mutandis, the facts in this case are, in all substantial respects, the same as in the Van Horn case. For the reasons stated in the opinion this day filed in Donley v. Van Horn, the judgment is reversed.

A petition to have the cause heard in the supreme court, after judgment in the district court of appeal, was denied by the supreme court on November 24, 1920.

All the Justices concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 Cal. App. 796, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/donley-v-west-calctapp-1920.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack