Crossman v. Davis
Before: Works
Synopsis
Estoppel—Res Adjudicata—Action foe Pabtition—Dismissal upon Agbeement of Compbomise. — The dismissal of an action for partition of real estate, under a special agreement of compromise involving other disputed matters, is a bar to any claim of title thereto by the-plaintiff or his grantee with knowledge of the agreement and dismissal, as against the defendant or his grantee in a subsequent action for partition of the same real estate.
Works, J. —Action for the partition of real estate. Findings and judgment for the defendant, that he was the owner of all the property in controversy.
The appeal is from the judgment, and comes to us on the judgment roll.
The only real question presented by the record is, whether or not a certain agreement between the grantors of the parties to this action, by which said parties compromised and dismissed an action pending between them, involving the title to this same property, was a bar to the plaintiff’s claim to an interest therein. The court below found that the dismissal of the action under a special agreement involving other disputed matters was sufficient to bar the plaintiff’s claim, and in this we think the court was right. (Merritt v. Campbell, 47 Cal. 542.)
The plaintiff had full knowledge of the agreement and dismissal, and must be held to have been bound thereby.
Judgment affirmed.
McFarland, J., Paterson, J., Thornton, J:, Sharp-stein, J., and Beatty, C. J., concurred.
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)