Yates v. Smith

California Supreme Court

Yates v. Smith

38 Cal. 60, 1869 Cal. LEXIS 110

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 1, 1869

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 38 Cal. 60 (Yates v. Smith) 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

Yates v. Smith, 38 Cal. 60, 1869 Cal. LEXIS 110 (Cal. 1869).

Pincite

Opinions

Rhodes, J., delivered the opinion of the Court:

This case, in its material facts, is not distinguishable from Treadway v. Semple (28 Cal. 652), and Semple v. Wright (32 Cal. 659.) The fact that plaintiff received a conveyance of the premises in controversy before the confirmation of the survey of the Jimeno rancho, is not material, as, under the rule laid down in Rodrigues v. United States (1 Wal. 587)— upon the authority of which these cases were decided—the confirmation of the survey was binding upon all persons, whether they intervened or not. If that rule is believed to be wrong, the correction must be sought in the tribunal that laid it down. Its decisions on questions of this character are binding on us.

Upon the authority of those cases, the judgment of the Court below is reversed, and cause remanded for a new trial.

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

Rhodes, J., delivered the opinion of the Court:

This case, in its material facts, is not distinguishable from Treadway v. Semple (28 Cal. 652), and Semple v. Wright (32 Cal. 659.) The fact that plaintiff received a conveyance of the premises in controversy before the confirmation of the survey of the Jimeno rancho, is not material, as, under the rule laid down in Rodrigues v. United States (1 Wal. 587)— upon the authority of which these cases were decided—the confirmation of the survey was binding upon all persons, whether they intervened or not. If that rule is believed to be wrong, the correction must be sought in the tribunal that laid it down. Its decisions on questions of this character are binding on us.

Upon the authority of those cases, the judgment of the Court below is reversed, and cause remanded for a new trial.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 Cal. 60, 1869 Cal. LEXIS 110, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/yates-v-smith-cal-1869.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack