Cleveland v. Choate
Synopsis
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, and from an order denying a new trial.
In 1856, Charles H. Poole prepared a map of the pueblo lands of the city of San Diego, lying between what is known as New San Diego in said city and the Mission Valley, comprising a strip of several miles, running from the bay of San Diego back to the eastern limits of the city. This map was for some years thereafter, until 1868, the official map of these pueblo lots, and was supposed to be correct until the surveys made by James Pascoe, county surveyor, December 6, 1867, June 12, 1868, and July 1, 1868, which demonstrated its incorrectness, and resulted in the making and adoption of the Pascoe map as the official map, in August, 1870. M. G. Wheeler was the deputy surveyor of James Pascoe, and surveyed the lots in controversy February 6, 1869, as the basis of deeds thereof from the city trustees. The defendants claimed lot 1132 under the grant thereof by the city trustees to Oliver P. Searles and Francisco Estudillo, who conveyed the same to A. B. Horton, who conveyed to the defendants. They also claimed the east half of lot 1123, under a deed from Horton, who claimed under a conveyance from C|ssiday, one of the original grantees of lot 1123, and who was a co-grantee with the plaintiff. The deed from Cassiday to Horton referred to the Poole map, but that from Horton to the defendants referred to the Pascoe map.
The suit was brought to quiet title to the west half of lot 1123. The defendant claimed that a proper survey, according to the description of the Poole map, had been made by Charles J. Fox, supported by T. S. Sedgwick, which.showed that lot 1123, by the Pascoe map, is all located within the boundaries of lot 1132 by the Poole map, and therefore belongs wholly to the defendants.
The further facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
The Court. This is an action to quiet title to certain property situate in the city of San Diego. The principal question involved relates to the admissibility-of parol testimony. There was evidence to show that the Poole map was inaccurate; that it had no scale or starting-point, and that a surveyor could not, by using the map, locate any of the pueblo lots. The map cannot be made to represent the territory which it purports to include. It was intended to cover all pueblo lands. Afterward one Pascoe made a survey which demonstrated that there was a strip of land half a mile wide between New San Diego and Mission Valley, which was not shown on the Poole map. Poole’s map did not show his starting-point, and the witnesses at the trial could not agree as to what was the proper starting-point. Poole’s map was not made from an actual survey, but was compiled from other maps. The land is described in the deed as follows: “Being that lot of land and west half of lot 1123, bounded as follows: Commencing at a stake, being the southwest corner of said lot No. 1123, running thence north forty chains to a stake, thence east twenty chains to a stake, thence south forty chains to a stake, thence west twenty chains to the place of beginning, containing eighty acres of land, according to the official map of said city, made by Charles H. Poole, A. D. 1856.”
The evidence shows that the city required the purchasers to survey the land before deeds were made. The lands in • controversy were surveyed, and trees planted thereon by the grantees. The surveys were returned to the city trustees before any deeds were executed. These surveys were before the board of trustees when the deeds were made. One of the trustees, who signed all the deeds in controversy, went upon the lands before the deeds were executed and procured lot 1132 to be surveyed, took possession of the same, and planted trees thereon. The applications of Cleveland and Cassi[77]day for lot 1.123, and of Searles and Estudillo for lot 1132, were granted by the same resolution. The same surveyor acted for all parties, and the surveys were made at the same time, and all included in one set of field-notes. The surveyor, Wheeler, filed his field-notes and diagram for the city trustees, and upon these the city trustees acted in making the deeds. The parties respectively took possession of their lands as surveyed, and planted trees upon the same. The stake named in the description in the deed as the beginning-point of the survey was fully identified by the surveyor who made the survey. In July, 1868, a public park was laid out and marked with stakes. The tract thus laid out as a park has been maintained as such to this time, and has been well known and designated upon all the maps as the city park. At the time Wheeler made his survey there was a stake at the northwest corner of the park, marked northwest corner of pueblo lot 1131, the northeast corner of lot 1132, and the southeast corner of lot 1123, and southwest corner of lot 1134. Lot 1123 was located so that the southeast corner thereof was identical with the northwest corner of the park. The surveyor located lot 1132 at the same time he located lot 1123, and he made the northeast corner of 1132 identical with the northwest corner of the park. According to the Poole map, lot 1132 lies directly west of lot 1131, the west line of 1131 corresponding with the east line of 1132. According to the same map, lot 1123 lies immediately adjoining 1132 on the north, the southern line of 1123 being the northern boundary line of 1132. The northwest corner of lot 1131, therefore, is identical with the southeast corner of lot 1123 according to the Poole map.
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)