F. A. Hihn Co. v. Fleckner
California Supreme Court
Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Santa Cruz County denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHarrison, J.
Ejectment. Appeal from an order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial.
1. The complaint alleges that the plaintiff is seised in fee simple of the demanded premises, and that the defendant is in the unlawful and wrongful possession thereof, and wrongfully withholds the possession from the plaintiff The defendant does not deny the seisin of the plaintiff or the possession by "himself, but denies that his possession and withholding is wrongful or unlawful. Upon these admissions the court correctly found as a conclusion of law that the plaintiff is entitled to recover the possession of the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Payne & Dewey v. TreadwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- Winslow v. GohransenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Love v. ShartzerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
3Cited by10 opinions
- Cutting Fruit Packing Co. v. CantyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Nathan v. DierssenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
- Gervaise v. BrookinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- McDuff v. McDuffCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
- Victor Power and Mining Co. v. ColeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1909
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.