Skip to main content
· 7/1/1862

Fulton v. Hanlow

Citations

  • 20 Cal. 450
  • 1862 Cal. LEXIS 65

Syllabus

<p>The decision in Hart v. Burnett (15 Cal. 530) cited and followed upon the following points: That the city of San Francisco succeeded to the rights of the pueblo of Yerba Buena in the lands of the pueblo; that these lands were held in trust for the public use of the city; that they were not, either under the old Government or the new, the subject of seizure and sale under execution; that the title of the city was unaffected by sales of the Sheriff under executions against her; and that a defendant in ejectment, relying solely upon his possession, may set up the invalidity of such sales, or of the title derived therefrom, in defense to the action.</p> <p>A declaration in a decree upon the character of the title of one of the parties, when the consideration of !he character of such title is foreign to the case and unnecessary for its disposition, is without any binding force as an adjudication either upon parties, privies, or any one else.</p> <p>In order that a judgment may be a defense in another action on the ground of res judicata, the same point must have been directly in issue and determined by the judgment.</p> <p>It is the point as to which relief is sought and upon which the judgment rests, and not any incidental or secondary matter that may have been controverted by the parties, that becomes res judicata.</p> <p>The city and county of San Francisco filed a complaint for the purpose of obtaining an injunction against the execution of a deed by the Sheriff to a purchaser under an execution sale of property held by the city, making the purchaser, the judgment creditor, and the Sheriff, parties defendant. The complaint set up the nature of the city’s title to the property, and facts going to show that it was not the subject of levy and sale under execution, and averred that a deed to the purchaser would be a cloud upon the title. The defendants answered, the judgment debtor and Sheriff disclaiming all interest in the controversy, and the purchaser denying in s

Judges: Field, Norton

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.