# Escondido High School District v. Escondido Seminary of University of Southern California

> California Supreme Court · September 27, 1900 · 130 Cal. 128

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3298113

## Case

- **Full name:** ESCONDIDO HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, Respondent, v. ESCONDIDO SEMINARY OF UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA Et Al., Appellants
- **Court:** California Supreme Court
- **Decided:** September 27, 1900
- **Citations:** 130 Cal. 128; 62 P. 401; 1900 Cal. LEXIS 801
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Temple
- **Judges:** Temple
- **Cited by:** 9 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3298113

## Opinion text

TEMPLE, J., concurring.
I concur in the judgment solely on the ground that, in my opinion, the Escondido Seminary of the University of Southern California was never the owner of the property, and has no interest in this controversy. All parties derive title from the Escondido Land and Town Company, which conveyed many lots and blocks by number to certain trustees. Block 340, the property involved here, was not thus conveyed, nor was it mentioned in the granting portion of the deed. In the clause following the
habendum,
in declaring the purposes of the trust, the trustees are directed to sell all the property, save and except block 340, "known as college grounds, .... which shall be reserved as the seat or campus for said seminary,” unless it shall become expedient to erect the buildings on adjacent property. The campus “may be conveyed” to the regents, in trust, for a campus. It is clear that tins property did not pass-by the deed, and had it been included, the trust, as to it, would have been a mere trust to convey, which is void. (Civ. Code, sec. 857.)

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3298113. Public record. Not legal advice.