Ejectment—Pleading—Denial of Eight of Possession.—An answer in an action of ejectment which does not deny the plaintiff’s ownership, but denies that he was at any time in the possession, or entitled to the possession, of the land and premises in controversy, and sets up a contract under which the defendants were lawfully in possession, presents a sufficient defense to the action.

Id.—Denial of Ousteb.—A denial that at any time “the defendants did enter upon the premises and oust, eject, or exclude the plaintiff therefrom,” is intended to go to the allegation of ouster, and not to the allegation of entry, which the pleadings and proofs show to have been lawful.

Id.—Conveyance by Devisee—Contract of Employment fob Life-Home for Life—Eight of Possession.—Where the deceased! daughter of the defendants, who was plaintiff’s wife, owned the premises, consisting of a ranch and orange orchard, which she had! placed in defendants’ possession, and devised the same to her-father, and defendants deeded the same to the plaintiff, under an-agreement that the father should be employed to cultivate and manage the property for the plaintiff at an annual salary for life,, and should employ needed assistance at plaintiff’s expense, and. account to plaintiff, the object of the agreement being stated to-insure to the defendants a home on, the ranch during their lives-, free of rent and all charges; such agreement, so long as performed, on defendants’ part, entitles them to the undisturbed use and occupation of the premises.

Id.—Distribution of Estate—Life Estate.—The right to the possession of the premises by the defendants under the contract does not depend upon -whether the estate of the deceased daughter had been lawfully distributed to her father as devisee thereof, nor upon whether the agreement did or did not vest a strict life estate in the defendants.