Carlson

after making the foregoing statement, delivered the opinion of the court.

Did the court err in dismissing the suit? In Heinze v. Butte & B. Con. M. Co., 126 F. 1 , 61 C.C.A. 63 , this court held that the bare denial of complainant’s title on information and belief, by defendants in a suit for partition, who do not alleged adverse title in themselves, does not put such title in issue, so as to require the court to stay the suit until it shall be established at law. That case is the principal one, among many others, relied upon by appellants to sustain their assignments of error herein. If identical in its facts, it might be considered binding upon the court in this case; but is it identical? We think not. In that case Judge Gilbert, delivering the opinion of the court said:, “In none of the pleadings so far filed in the case was any defect or infirmity in the complainant’s title alleged, nor was it asserted that any of the parties had adverse claims against *556 the alleged title of the complainant, or adverse possession of the property sought to be partitioned. All the information that was conveyed by the pleadings at that date was that the complainant, alleged a title in fee…