Opinion

Weringer v. Rutledge

  • 180 Cal. 566
  • 182 P. 31
  • 1919 Cal. LEXIS 525
Court
California Supreme Court
Filed
Jun 14, 1919
Status
Published
Author
Shaw
On the bench
Shaw, Lawlor
Cited by
8 cases
Authority
More cited than 34.9%

The opinion

SHAW, J.

I concur in the opinion of Justice Lawlor and in the judgment of affirmance. But the instructions numbered 1, 2, and 3 would not be full or complete with the addition of the single statement that the parties must be uncertain as to the location of the true line at the time they agree upon . a line beween the lands occupied by them, respectively. The instructions lacked other elements essential to such a fixing of the boundary and to the proper information of the jury. There should be no difficulty in framing a correct and full instruction on the subject. The law has been the subject of many decisions and will be found fully stated in

Schwab

v.

Donovan,

165 Cal. 363 , [ 132 Pac. 447 ];

Price

v.

De Reyes,

161 Cal. 486 , [ 119 Pac. 893 ];

Loustalot

v.

McKeel,

157 Cal. 641 , [ 108 Pac. 707 ] ;

Lewis

v.

Ogram,

149 Cal. 508 , [ 117 Am. St. Rep. 151 , 10 L. R. A. (N. S.) 610, 87 Pac.

60]; Young

v.

Blakeman,

153 Cal. 481 , [ 95 Pac. 888 ]; and

Grants Pass etc. Co. v. Brown,

168 Cal. 459 , [ 143 Pac. 754 ].

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.