Daubenbiss

Daubenbiss v. White

Good Law
1892 Cal. LEXIS 1063·3 Cal. Unrep. 590·31 P. 360
Supreme Court of CaliforniaNovember 10, 1892No. 14,519California2,601 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Haynes, J.

In ejectment. Plaintiff bases his right to recover upon prior possession alone. The answer denied plaintiff’s possession and his right thereto, alleged prior possession in themselves to part of the land, title in one Robinson to part, and their right to the possession of such part under a lease from the owner. The cause was tried by the court, without a jury. The court found in favor of defendants for the part they held under lease from Robinson, and in favor of plaintiff *591 for the remainder. Defendants moved for a new trial upon a statement, and this appeal is from the judgment, and the order denying a new trial. The transcript does not show the date at which the action was commenced, nor does it state the names of any of the defendants except that of Amos White. We gather from the findings, however, that the other defendants were L. M. Ladd, as administrator of the estate of C. H. Waters, deceased, and William Eastman. Prior to the trial the defendants White and Eastman succeeded to the interest of Waters, deceased. The land sought to be recovered is section 23, township 15 south, range 6 east, M. D., in San Benito county, and situate in the Gabilan mountains. Long prior to…

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.