County of Yolo v. Barney

Foote, C. This action was brought by the plaintiff to quiet its title to a piece of land claimed adversely by the defendant. An answer and cross-complaint was filed by the latter, in which, after denying the right and title of the plaintiff, she claims title by continuous adverse possession for more than five years before the commencement of the action, and asks that the plaintiff be made to show its interest in the land, and that her title thereto be quieted.

The court found, among other things, that all the allegations of the complaint were true; that the defendant was not the owner of the land, although she had been in possession of it for more than five years; that her possession was not such as entitled her to obtain title through the statute of limitations; that the land had been long before her entry dedicated to a public use by the county of Yolo, and that the right to such public use had never been relinquished or abandoned.

And as conclusions of law, “ that neither the defendant nor her grantors ever acquired any right, title, or interest in or to the land in controversy so dedicated to public use by their possession of the same; nor does the fact of such possession constitute a sufficient defense to this action.”

Judgment was given quieting the plaintiff’s title to the land, as against the defendant, and for costs. From that and an order refusing a new trial the appeal is taken.

It is contended that the findings are not supported by the evidence, chiefly for the reason, as alleged, that the land was never dedicated to a public use, but was bought [378]by the county as a private individual would buy property, and was subject to be resold by the county, abandoned as to whatever use it might have been temporarily put, and subject like ordinary municipal or private property to be acquired by peaceable and continuous adverse possession under the statute of limitations of five years.

The facts in evidence show that the land was purchased by the county, acting through its quasi trustees, the board of supervisors, for the purpose of erecting thereon a county hospital, and using the land for purposes connected therewith.

The hospital had been established thereon for about eight years when the defendant’s grantor took possession of and fenced the portion of the land in controversy, which up to that time had been uninclosed, and the defendant’s possession by herself or grantors has been since that time, for about fifteen years, peaceable and continuous. A deed to the land was made to the plaintiff in 1863 by one Freeman, and duly recorded, and a quitclaim deed was also made from the same grantor to the defendant’s grantor, one Sill, in 1867.