Kerr v. Brede
Citation | 180 Cal.App.2d 149,4 Cal.Rptr. 443 |
Court | California Court of Appeals |
Decision Date | 20 April 1960 |
Parties | Guy Burdette KERR, William J. Kerr and Dorothy C. Kerr, Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. Herbert C. BREDE, Jr., Herbert C. Brede, Sr., Samuel J. Davis and R. L. Davis, Defendants and Respondents. Civ. 9743. |
Mitchell & Henderson, Eureka, and Cooley, Crowley, Gaither, Castro & Huddleson, San Francisco, for appellants.
Mathews & Traverse, Eureka, for respondents.
Defendants own an easement of right-of-way across plaintiffs' timber land, acquired by grant. For several years prior to the filing of the present complaint defendants, by licensing independent loggers and truckers to use the road, have in effect operated a toll road. Plaintiffs contend that this licensing is in violation of the terms of the contract entered into by the predecessors in interest of the parties, and accordingly seek injunctive relief. The only issue presented is the construction of paragraph 6 of that contract which provides:
(Emphasis added.)
The trial court viewed the italicized clause as 'entirely gratuitous' and denied the relief sought. We have concluded that the court's decision was erroneous.
It is well settled that Keeler v. Haky, 160 Cal.App.2d 471, 474, 325 P.2d 648, 650. It is the further rule that a grant is to be construed in like manner with contracts generally. Civil Code, § 1066; Paddock v. Vasquez, 122 Cal.App.2d 396, 399-400, 265 P.2d 121. Thus 'the whole of a contract is to be taken together, so as to give effect to every part, if reasonably practicable, each clause helping to interpret the other.' Civ.Code, § 1641. Stated...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Continental Baking Co. v. Katz
...(1941) 17 Cal.2d 23, 29, 109 P.2d 329; Paddock v. Vasquez (1953) 122 Cal.App.2d 396, 399-- 400, 265 P.2d 121; Kerr v. Brede (1960) 180 Cal.App.2d 149, 151, 4 Cal.Rptr. 443; Wall v. Rudolph (1961) 198 Cal.App.2d 684, 692, 18 Cal.Rptr. 123, 3 A.L.R.3d 1242; Kerr Land & Timber Co. v. Emmerson ......
-
Kerr Land & Timber Co. v. Emmerson
...last clause of paragraph 6 was 'entirely gratuitous.' The District Court of Appeal for the Third Appellate District reversed (180 Cal.App.2d 149, 4 Cal.Rptr. 443). Thereafter, the rights in the easement having been transferred, a second amended complaint was filed joining the Emmersons. Thi......
-
National City v. California Water & Tel. Co.
...and appurtenances. The use of an easement 'must be confined strictly to the purposes for which it was granted.' (Kerr v. Brede, 180 Cal.App.2d 149, 151, 4 Cal.Rptr. 443, 445). It has been held that an easement permitting the conveyance of water by ditch did not authorize a conveyance by pip......
-
McManus v. Sequoyah Land Associates
...construing an instrument conveying an easement the rules applicable to the construction of deeds generally apply. (Kerr v. Brede, 180 Cal.App.2d 149, 150, 4 Cal.Rptr. 443; Eastman v. Piper, 68 Cal.App. 554, 561, 229 P. 1002.) Accordingly, where the language of a grant of easement is ambiguo......