Chapman v. Polack

Citations

• 2 Cal. Unrep. 424
• 5 P. 232

Syllabus

<p>Judgment—Description of Property.—It being an admitted fact that the Geyser springs and hotel improvements are located on the N. E. of section 13 (the property in controversy), there was no impropriety in adding to the description of the property in the judgment the words “the same being known as the ‘Geyser Hotel property.’ ”</p>