Sacramento Savings Bank v. Hynes
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, Sixth Judicial District, County of Sacramento. E. H. Cone, on the 21st of July, 1868, filed his complaint against the defendant to recover possession of the southeast quarter of section twenty-four, in township nine north, range two east, Mount Diablo base and meridian, lying in Tolo County. The defendant answered.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court, Sixth Judicial District, County of Sacramento. E. H. Cone, on the 21st of July, 1868, filed his complaint against the defendant to recover possession of the southeast quarter of section twenty-four, in township nine north, range two east, Mount Diablo base and meridian, lying in Tolo County. The defendant answered. September 9, 1870, the defendant stipulated that the plaintiff might file a supplemental complaint, which contained au allegation that on the 2d day of May, 1870, the United States had issued to the plaintiff a patent for the land. The complaint was…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Rhodes, J.:
The defendant ought to have objected to the filing of the supplemental complaint, by which it was attempted to set up title acquired after the commencement of the action; for it is a rule in the action of ejectment, of such universal recognition, that the plaintiff can recover only on such title as he held at the commencement of the action, that we forbear to state any reason or cite an authority in its support. The admission in evidence of the patent issued to the plaint*201iff’s grantor, after the commencement of the action, was erroneous; but the error was rendered…
2Cited by7 opinions
- People v. McKennaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- People v. WaltherCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
- Heller v. Dyerville Manufacturing Co.California Supreme Court · 1897
- Burling v. ThompkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Dreyfus v. BadgerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.