Zucco

Zucco v. Farullo

Good Law
1918 Cal. App. LEXIS 397·37 Cal. App. 562·174 P. 929
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 17, 1918Civ. No. 2278.California2,250 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Beasly, J.

This is an action primarily of unlawful detainer, in which the defendant defaulted, and judgment was thereupon taken against him for the possession of the premises demanded and for damages, and for some other relief hereinafter noticed. He appeals from this judgment, and makes three points for reversal, namely, that three causes of action are improperly united in the complaint, to wit, first, a suit in equity for the reformation of a lease; second, an action at law for damages for breach of the covenants of the lease, and, third, an aetioh of unlawful detainer.

This court, upon an appeal upon the judgment-roll from a default judgment, will not consider the question of misjoinder of causes of action in the manner it would if a demurrer had been filed in the case upon that ground. If a complaint states a cause of action sufficient as against a general demurrer to sustain the relief actually given in the judgment, it will not be held invalid because it also states facts authorizing other relief. This follows from the rule laid down in Alexander v. McDow, 108 Cal. 25 , [ 41 Pac. 24 ], and Amestoy v. Electric Rapid Transit Co., 95 Cal. 311 , [ 30 Pac. 550 ]. The complaint herein is…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.