Valentine

The contest in this case is as to the prior possession of a parcel of land in San Francisco. The plaintiff deraigns his title through B. S. Brooks, and on the trial put in evidence, against the objection of the defendant, the judgment-roll in an action of ejectment, wherein said Brooks was plaintiff against Crosby, executor of Kline, defendant; and wherein Brooks recovered a judgment or restitution, for a larger tract, including the premises in controversy. He also put in evidence a writ of restitution, issued on the judgment, and the sheriff’s return thereon, from which it appeared that in September, 1863, the sheriff executed the writ, by placing Brooks in possession of the entire tract, including the premises in controversy. The present defendant, Jansen, was not a party to that action; and there was no priority between him and the defendant therein. So far as appears, Jansen was altogether a stranger to that action. In connection with this proof, the plaintiff called as a witness the deputy sheriff who executed the writ, who testified that, in executing it, he took his directions from Brooks, the plaintiff in the action; and that when he went to execute it, he found Jansen in…