Figg v. Mayo

Citations

• 39 Cal. 262

Syllabus

<p>Enromes.—Pbactice.—It is a reprehensible practice to blend together, in the findings by the Court, the facts found and the conclusions of law.</p> <p>Idem.—When the facts are so obscurely found, or are so blended with legal con_ elusions, as to render it doubtful whether the facts are only hypothetically stated, it must be disregarded as a finding of facts.</p> <p>Idem.—Pbesumption'. — When the findings are silent upon essential points, every presumption will be indulged in support of the judgment.</p> <p>Idem.—Mexican Gbants.—Statute of Limitations.—In an action involving rights under a Mexican grant, and also under the Statute of Limitations, if the findings he wholly silent as to the date of the final approval of the official survey, or of the entry upon the premises in controversy, it will he presumed that the survey was approved and the entry made at such times as would support the judgment.</p> <p>Statutory Constbuotion.—Statute of Limitations.—Adverse Possession.— The object of Section 10 of the Statute of Limitations is to define accurately under what conditions a possession shall he decreed adverse, when the party enters under a claim of title founded upon a written instrument, judgment or decree.</p> <p>Idem.—The party who invokes the benefit of that section in aid of bis possession, must show that he entered not only under a claim of title, but it must also be exclusive of any other right.</p> <p>Idem.—Town Lots. —A block of land in a town or city, which is represented on the plan or map of the city as surrounded by public streets, and divided in the center by an alley, and laid out in lots appropriately numbered, is within the spirit and letter of the exception of Section 10 of the Statute of Limitations.</p>