Wentworth & Osborn v. Miller & Lux

53 Cal. 9
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 1, 1878
DocketNo. 5668
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 53 Cal. 9 (Wentworth & Osborn v. Miller & Lux) 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
Wentworth & Osborn v. Miller & Lux, 53 Cal. 9 (Cal. 1878).

Opinion

By the Court :

Whatever may be the character of the instrument recited in the findings and denominated a lease, it is clear that by the terms of the contract the grain, after it was cut, was under the control of defendants, and in so far as it was in possession of the lessees, so called, was in their possession simply as servants of defendants.

The purchasers from the lessees acquired no other or greater interest in the grain than that of the parties named as lessees, and could assert no right to the possession as against the defendants.

Judgment and order reversed and cause remanded. Remittitur forthwith.

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

Related

Wescott v. Mathers
263 N.W. 231 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1935)
Comar Oil Co. v. Richter
1927 OK 357 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1927)
Sanford v. Modine
71 N.W. 740 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1897)
Stockton Savings & Loan Society v. Purvis
44 P. 561 (California Supreme Court, 1896)
Consolidated Land & Irrigation Co. v. Hawley
63 N.W. 904 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1895)
Horseley v. Moss Pennington
23 S.W. 1115 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1893)
Gray v. Robinson
33 P. 712 (Arizona Supreme Court, 1893)
DeVaughn v. Howell
82 Ga. 336 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1889)
Howell v. Foster
3 P. 647 (California Supreme Court, 1884)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
53 Cal. 9, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wentworth-osborn-v-miller-lux-cal-1878.