Romie v. Casanova (1872) · DecisionDepot

Romie v. Casanova

Name: California Superior Court Tentative Rulings
Creator: DecisionDepot
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

California Supreme Court Jul 1, 1872 No. No. 3,436Published

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the lower court's finding that the premises were validly granted by the Alcalde in 1845 and that the location of the lot was consistent with the grant's description.

Issues

Whether the evidence supports the finding that the premises were granted by the Alcalde in 1845.
Whether the description in the grant requires the lot to be immediately adjoining the Buelna house.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The Court below finds that the demanded premises were granted by the Alcalde to the defendant’s grantor in 1845, and that juridical possession thereof was given.”

“The words in the grant, “this lot being situated to the south of the house of the citizen Buelna,” do not necessarily imply that the lot was immediately adjoining the house of Buelna.”

Synopsis

Construction of Alcalde Grant.—An Alcalde granted a lot in the Pueblo of San José to P., describing it as “ situated to the south of the house of the citizen Feliz Buelna and in this municipality.” Held, that the description may he construed to mean south of the lot of Buelna.

By the Court: The Court below finds that the demanded premises were granted by the Alcalde to the defendant’s grantor in 1845, and that juridical possession thereof was given. We think the evidence justifies the finding. The words in the grant, “this lot being situated to the south of the house of the citizen Buelna,” do not necessarily imply that the lot was immediately adjoining the house of Buelna. It may well have been, where the Court finds it was, to the south of the Buelna lot.

Judgment and order affirmed.

Romie v. Casanova

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief