Potter v. Knowles

5 Cal. 87
California Supreme Court·Decided July 1, 1855·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Heydenfeldt, J., delivered the opinion of the Court.

Murray, C. J., concurred.

When McDonnell the grantor of the defendant, went into possession by license or permission of the plaintiff’s agent, his possession became that of the plaintiff—and upon this prior possession, the latter is entitled to recover. In Adams on Ejectment, the rule in such cases is laid down thus:—“It has already been observed, that possession is prima facie evidence of ownership ; and as between two parties who rely upon possession solely, the presumption is in favor of the first possessor ; so that proof of possession by a claimant, however short, will entitle him to recover, unless the defendant can account for such possession, or show a prior possession or title in himself, or a third person.”

It only remains to add, that the new trial upon the affidavits filed wan properly denied.

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

Potter v. Knowles, 5 Cal. 87 (Cal. 1855).

5 Cal. 87 (Potter v. Knowles) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cline v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County
193 P. 929 (California Supreme Court, 1920)
Reid v. Superior Court
186 P. 634 (California Court of Appeal, 1919)
State v. Elder
143 P. 482 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1914)
In Re Cole
107 P. 581 (California Court of Appeal, 1909)
Ex parte Burk
2 Colo. L. Rep. 150 (California Supreme Court, 1881)
Ex parte Burke
59 Cal. 6 (California Supreme Court, 1881)