Merryman v. Kirby
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Humboldt County. E. W. Wilson, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.
The action is in ejectment and the appeal is upon the judgment-roll alone from the judgment in favor of plaintiffs.
No demurrer to the complaint was interposed but the appellants now contend that the complaint states no cause of action. In this connection it is asserted that there is no allegation as to ownership of the property at the time of the commencement of the action. Citation is made of authorities to the effect that “plaintiffs must show that at the time of the commencement of the action they have the proper title or interest to support the action of ejectment” (Moore v. Tice, 22 Cal.…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Payne & Dewey v. TreadwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- Vance v. AndersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Johnson v. VanceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Hawxhurst v. LanderCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
- Bay State Mining & Townsite Co. v. JacksonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1900
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- City of Oakland v. WheelerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1917
- Hutchison v. BarrCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- Empire Securities Co. v. LevyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920