Brummagim v. Spencer
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the County Court, Sacramento County. The plaintiff sued, in the County Court, as administrator with the will annexed of the estate of Amelia Moss, deceased, and alleged in the complaint that his testatrix on the 2d day of January, 1865, leased to the defendant a house and lot in the City of Sacramento, and that defendant agreed to pay her therefor eighteen dollars per month, payable on the second day of each month, in advance, and that defendant had failed to pay…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the County Court, Sacramento County. The plaintiff sued, in the County Court, as administrator with the will annexed of the estate of Amelia Moss, deceased, and alleged in the complaint that his testatrix on the 2d day of January, 1865, leased to the defendant a house and lot in the City of Sacramento, and that defendant agreed to pay her therefor eighteen dollars per month, payable on the second day of each month, in advance, and that defendant had failed to pay the rent which fell due on the 2d days of July, August, September, October, and November, and that on the 7th day vof…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Rhodes, J.
The first ground of the defendant’s demurrer is fully answered by the case of Caulfield v. Stevens, 28 Cal. 118. In that case we held that the general terms—“ actions of forcible entry and detainer ”—as employed in the Constitution of this State, included actions for the unlawful holding over by tenants, and that jurisdiction of those actions was committed by the Constitution to the County Courts.
The only remaining ground that requires attention, is that . the plaintiff does not allege a demand'of the rent, previous to the making of the demand for the surrender of the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Caulfield v. StevensCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
3Cited by2 opinions
- Johnson v. ChelyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
- Davidson v. QuinnAppellate Division of the Superior Court of California · 1982