Stay Et Al v. Friedman

• Court: U.S. Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: WAITE
• Citation: Stay Et Al v. Friedman, 92 U.S. 723, 23 L.Ed. 767 (1875)
• Decision Date: 01 October 1875
• Parties: McSTAY ET AL. v. FRIEDMAN

92 U.S. 723

23 L.Ed. 767

McSTAY ET AL. v. FRIEDMAN.

October Term, 1875

MOTION to dismiss a writ of error to the Supreme Court of the State of California.

Mr. Aaron A. Sargent for the defendant in error, in support of the motion.

Mr. W. Irvine, contra.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the court.

This was an action of ejectment brought by Friedman to recover the possession of a certain parcel of the Pueblo lands confirmed to the city of San Francisco by the act of Congress passed March 8, 1866 (14 Stat. 4). He did not attempt to connect himself with the city title, but relied entirely upon his alleged prior possession and that of his grantors.

The defendants, who are the plaintiffs in error, set up in their answer, as defences, (1) adverse possession, with specifications to bring themselves within the operation of the Statute of Limitations; and (2) the title of the city of San Francisco under the act of Congress, and an assignment of that title to themselves, pursuant to the provisions of an ordinance of the city and an act of the legislature of California.

At the trial no question was raised as to the validity or operative effect of the act of Congress. The effort on the part of the plaintiffs in error seems to have been (1) to establish their defence under the Statute of Limitations; and (2) to prove such possession as would, according to their claim,...