McCoy v. Byrd
O. S. McCOY v. PLEASANT BYRD
Syllabus
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Ross, J.
It is well settled that an applicant seeking to purchase land from the State must set out in his affidavit the facts required by the statute to be stated therein. (Botsford v. Howell, 52 Cal. 158 ; Hildebrand v. Stewart, 41 Cal. 387; Woods v. Sawtelle, 46 Cal. 389 .) The statute under which the plaintiff’s application is made (Pol. Code, § 3443) requires the affiant to state, among other things, that he knows the land applied for and the exterior bounds thereof, and knows, of his own knowledge, that there are no settlers thereon; or, if there are, that the land has been segregated more than six months by authority of the United States. From the affidavit of the plaintiff it does not appear whether there are or are not settlers on the land which he seeks to purchase. The courts cannot hold immaterial, matters which the statute declares must be stated.
Judgment affirmed.
McKinstry, J., and McKee, J., concurred.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 1 case
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.