McCourtney v. Fortune
Citations
- 57 Cal. 617
Syllabus
<p>Ejectment—Evidence—Prior Possession.—In an action of ejectment, where the question is one of prior possession, the judgment rolls in actions of ejectment between the grantors of the plaintiff and the defendant are admissible in evidence as tending to prove possession.</p> <p>Bindings—Immaterial Error—Statute of Limitations.—A judgment will not be reversed where the want of a finding on a particular issue is not prejudicial to the appellant. Held, accordingly, in an action of ejectment, where the Court found that the plaintiff was never the owner nor entitled to the possession of the premises, it was unnecessary to find upon an issue of the Statute of Limitations.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that appearance of convicted attorney continuing to practice does more to disrupt public confidence in the legal profession than any other disciplinary problem
- rejecting argument that suspension of lawyer’s law license before his appeals were final violated his due process rights
- “[T]he appearance of a convicted attorney continuing to practice does more to disrupt public confidence in the legal profession than any other disciplinary problem.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: McKee
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced 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.