Townsend v. Little

Decided July 1, 1873

California Supreme Court · decided 1873-07-01

The demanded premises were the southwest quarter of section twenty-one, township number three south, range number three east, Mt. Diablo meridian, Alameda County. The plaintiffs resided in San Francisco, and, prior to 1870, had inclosed a large tract of land, ifie-ludlng the demanded premises. Previous to the FsJI of 1870, one Taylor had leased from the plaintiffs the whole, tract and farmed it to small grain.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently April 1961

2 state decisions

Relies on Shelby v. Houston

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1873-07-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

By the Court:

¶1This action is brought under the third section of the Forcible Entry and Detainer Act of 1866. (Stats. 1865-6, p. 768.) If the defendant entered upon the land in good faith, believing she had a legal right to enter, this action cannot be maintained. (Shelby v. Houston, 38 Cal. 422.) The evidence tended to show that the land was public surveyed land of the United States; that the defendant was in all respects a qualified preemptor; and that before her answer was filed she had filed in the proper United States Land Office her declaratory statement for the quarter section in question. As there was nothing to the contrary, we think this was sufficient evidence that she entered in good faith, believing she had a legal right to do so.

¶2Judgment and order reversed and cause remanded.