Kockemann

Action to quiet title to a lot of land in the city of Los Angeles.

Besides denying the material allegations of the complaint, the defendants pleaded the statute of limitations (Code Civ. Proc., sec. 318), under which they claim title by prescription.

The trial was by the court without a jury, and the court found for the defendants on all the issues, and gave judgment accordingly. Plaintiff appeals from the judgment, and from an order denying his motion for a new trial.

It is clear that the defendants and their grantors were in the possession of the lot in controversy continuously during the period of more than five years immediately preceding the commencement of this action, and the only question presented for decision is, Was such possession continuously adverse to the plaintiff and his testator?

Defendants’ grantor entered into possession under a tax deed executed by the proper officer, definitely describing the lot, and otherwise in due form, except it recited, in substance, that the lot in question was offered for sale, together with three other lots in the same city, to pay the delinquent taxes assessed on the four lots, to unknown owners, and that the lot in question…