Chapman v. Polack
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.
Most, if not all, of the questions involved in this appeal are substantially determined by the cases entitled Chapman v. Polack, 58 Cal. 553 , United States v. Chapman, 5 Saw. 528 , Fed. Cas. No. 14,785, and Polack v. Gurnee, No. 8229, 66 Cal. 266 , 5 Pac. 229 .
We do not find any denial of the averment of the cross-complaint to the effect that the Geyser springs and hotel improvements are located on the N. E. % of section 13. It was therefore an admitted fact in the case, and being so, 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.’ ”
Judgment and order affirmed.
We concur: McKee, J.; McKinstry, J.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 0 cases
No case in this database cites this case.