| |
| | San Francisco History - Noe Valley Land Suit |
 | | Noe died, under the Spanish law as it then existed the property vested in her children, and the husband had nothing more than a usufructuary interest during the minority of the children. |
 | | It being plaintiffs' contention that Noe, the husband could, in law, only convey a valid title to an undivided one-half, at most, of the property to Horner, though the deed purported to convey the whole, and that the title to the remaining one-half is still vested in the heirs of the wife. |
 | | Noe made no transfer in his lifetime to his wife; he died long subsequent to her death, and she therefore, could have received no claim to the property as his successor in interest. |
| www.sfgenealogy.com /sf/history/hgnoe.htm (3713 words) |
|