Heath v. Wilson

California Supreme Court

Heath v. Wilson

73 P. 182, 139 Cal. 362, 1903 Cal. LEXIS 830

California Supreme Court·Decided June 19, 1903·No. S.F. No. 2109.·Published·Cited by 20 cases

Opinion

When this case was in Department, the foregoing opinion was prepared. After further consideration, we are satisfied with and adopt the same, and are of the opinion that for the reasons therein given the judgment of the lower court was right. It is therefore not necessary to consider the contention of counsel for respondent that the latter had acquired a perfect title by adverse possession.

The judgment appealed from is affirmed.

Shaw, J., Van Dyke, J., Lorigan, J., Henshaw, J., and Angellotti, J., concurred.

Rehearing denied.

Beatty, C.J., dissented from the order denying a rehearing.

*Page 370

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

When this case was in Department, the foregoing opinion was prepared. After further consideration, we are satisfied with and adopt the same, and are of the opinion that for the reasons therein given the judgment of the lower court was right. It is therefore not necessary to consider the contention of counsel for respondent that the latter had acquired a perfect title by adverse possession.

The judgment appealed from is affirmed.

Shaw, J., Van Dyke, J., Lorigan, J., Henshaw, J., and Angellotti, J., concurred.

Rehearing denied.

Beatty, C.J., dissented from the order denying a rehearing.

*Page 370

Heath v. Wilson, 73 P. 182, 139 Cal. 362, 1903 Cal. LEXIS 830 (Cal. 1903).

Pincite

73 P. 182 (Heath v. Wilson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related