Sullivan

Sullivan v. Davis

Good Law
4 Cal. 291
Supreme Court of CaliforniaOctober 15, 1854California247 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hevdeneeldt, J.

delivered the opinion of the Court.

1. The> power of attorney from Cheever to Cheever is in very general terms, “confirming all sales, leases and contracts of every description.” I can see no reason why it does not confer the power to sell land. If language is the index of intention, in this case it cannot be misunderstood.

2. The deed to the plaintiff, as to its legal effect, must be construed most strongly against the grantor. It would, therefore, operate as an ordinary quit claim, by which all the right and title of the grantor is conveyed, and it is suffi *293 cient to enable the grantee to maintain ejectment, if the grantor could have done so.

3. Under our Practice Act, it is competent for the plaintiff to recover real property with damages for withholding it, and the rents and profits, all in the same action, and as one cause of action. The Act does not intend merely to give the power of uniting these as different causes in one action, but treating the recovery of real estate, and the rents and profits or damages, as one cause of action, it allows many such causes to be united,

4. The claim of title by the defendant, by virtue of a Sheriff’s deed, is insufficient,…

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.