Dunphy v. Heinmann

17 P. 5, 2 Cal. Unrep. 851
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 15, 1888
DocketNo. 11,189
StatusPublished
Cited by19 cases

This text of 17 P. 5 (Dunphy v. Heinmann) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dunphy v. Heinmann, 17 P. 5, 2 Cal. Unrep. 851 (Cal. 1888).

Opinion

Per CURIAM.

Appeal from the judgment. The only point made is that there was no finding upon the issue as to ouster. It is found that plaintiff was not at any time the owner of the premises, or entitled to the possession thereof or any part of the same, “nor did defendant, during any of said time, wrongfully or unlawfully enter upon or oust the plaintiff therefrom, nor then nor now wrongfully withhold the same or any part thereof from plaintiff.” This appeal was evidently not taken in good faith, and is frivolous.

Judgment affirmed, with fifty dollars damages for taking a frivolous appeal.

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

Related

Saddozai v. Nelson
N.D. California, 2020
Lindsey v. Pacific Electric Railway Co.
296 P. 131 (California Court of Appeal, 1931)
Kirby v. Southern Pacific Co.
216 P. 735 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1923)
Cathcart v. Oregon-Washington R. & N. Co.
168 P. 308 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1917)
Long v. Pacific Ry. & Nav. Co.
144 P. 462 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1914)
Dalrymple v. Covey Motor Car Co.
135 P. 91 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1913)
Wilkinson v. Oregon Short Line Railroad
99 P. 466 (Utah Supreme Court, 1909)
Jackson v. Sumpter Valley R'y Co.
93 P. 356 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1908)
Kunz v. Oregon Railroad & N. Co.
93 P. 141 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1907)
State v. Richardson
85 P. 225 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1906)
Van Winkle v. New York, Chicago & St. Louis Railroad
73 N.E. 157 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1905)
Schleiger v. Northern Terminal Co.
72 P. 324 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1903)
Shobert v. May
55 L.R.A. 810 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1901)
Hecker v. Oregon Railroad
66 P. 270 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1901)
Bush v. Union Pacific Railroad
64 P. 624 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1901)
Blackburn v. Southern Pacific Co.
55 P. 225 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1898)
Howard v. Northern Central Railway Co.
1 N.Y.S. 528 (New York Supreme Court, 1888)
Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fé Railroad v. Townsend
39 Kan. 115 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1888)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
17 P. 5, 2 Cal. Unrep. 851, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dunphy-v-heinmann-cal-1888.