Hagar

The demurrer should have been sustained for an improper "union of several causes of action. (Dyer v. Barstow, 50 Cal. 652 .)

The denials in the answer should not have been stricken out. ( Tynan v. Walker, 35 Cal. 634 .) An estoppel is waived where the facts constituting the estoppel are laid open by averment, ( Mcgerle v. Ashe, 33 Cal. 84 ; Phila. Wil. Co. v. Howard, 13 How. 518 .)

There was no finding of fact that the Commissioners jointly *177 viewed and assessed the land. (People v. Coghill, 47 Gal. 361; Fratt v. Toomis, 48 Cal. 35 .)

The Sacramento Valley Reclamation Company did not have a corporate existence. The act under which it is pretended that it incorporated reads as follows :

The order of the Board of Supervisors approving of the petition may be attacked collaterally. (Starbuck v. Murray, 5 Wend. 156 ; People v. Hurlburt, 46 N. Y. 113 ; People v. Knowles, 47 N. Y. 415 ; Code of Civil Procedure, secs. 456, 1906, 1916, 1978, 1962, sub. 6 and 1963; Smith v. Rice, 11 Mass. 507 .)

W. F. Goad, also for the Appellants.

A. L. Hart, S. W. Sanderson, and William Blanding, for the Respondent.

As to the alleged misjoinder in joining, as defendants, the several tracts…