McTarnahan v. Pike
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tuolumne County, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
Vanclief, C.
The action is ejectment to recover possession of fifty acres of placer mineral land described by legal subdivisions of section 22, township 2, range 14 north, Mt. Diablo meridian, and called “ Crystal -Spring Gravel Placer Mine,” situate in the county of Tuolumne.
The complaint is in the most general form, alleging, in substance, that plaintiffs own the demanded premises and are entitled to the possession thereof, and that deféndant is wrongfully in possession and wrongfully withholds the possession from the plaintiffs.
The answer of the defendant specially denies each allegation of…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Campbell v. BuckmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
- Haven v. HawsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
3Cited by1 opinion
- Kerr v. SnowdenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1914