Klein

Klein v. Loeffler

Good Law
1929 Cal. App. LEXIS 847·96 Cal. App. 383·274 P. 373
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 22, 1929Docket No. 3324.California801 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Finch, J.

The original complaint herein sets forth a cause of action for forcible detainer by defendant of real property described in the complaint. The answer denies the allegations of the complaint and alleges ownership and “the quiet, peaceable, open and notorious possession of said premises” by the defendant. In an amended complaint, made after trial, “so as to conform to the proof,” it is alleged that at all times after October 11, 1926, the plaintiffs were the owners of the property and entitled to the possession thereof; that the 1 ‘ defendant, who, after having entered peaceably upon said real property as a gratuitous occupant thereof, holds possession of the premises hereinbefore described, and refuses to vacate said premises”; that the usual thirty-day notice to terminate the defendant’s tenancy and the three-day notice to vacate the premises were duly served and that the defendant refused to surrender possession thereof. The court found that at the time of the commencement of the action the plaintiffs were entitled to the possession of the property; that at all times after October 11, 1926, they were the owners thereof; that during that time the defendant “entered peaceably upon…

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.