Medeiros v. Medeiros

California Court of Appeal Jan 8, 1960 No. Civ. 9644Published

Before: Schottky

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the plaintiff was entitled to a jury trial because the complaint, which alleged that the defendants were in possession of the property and wrongfully withholding it, constituted an action at law for ejectment. Consequently, the trial court did not err in granting a new trial after initially denying the jury demand.

Issues

Whether the plaintiff was entitled to a jury trial in an action to quiet title where the complaint alleged the defendants were in possession of the property.
Whether the plaintiff waived the right to a jury trial by failing to formally except to the court's denial of the jury demand.

Disposition. Order granting new trial affirmed; cross-appeal dismissed.

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The action had the essential characteristics of the old legal action of ejectment.”

“We conclude that under the rules laid down by our Supreme Court the plaintiff in the instant case was entitled to a trial by jury and that the trial court did not err in granting plaintiff’s motion for a new trial.”

SCHOTTKY, J.

John F. Medeiros and Mamie P. Cotta, as special administratrix of the estate of Manuel Medeiros, appeal from an order of the trial court granting Mary Medeiros a new trial in an action brought by her to quiet title to certain real and personal property, and Mary Medeiros appeals from the judgment in favor of John Medeiros.

The Appeal op John Medeiros and Mamie P. Cotta, as Special Administratrix op the Estate op Manuel Medeiros :

The complaint filed by Mary Medeiros alleged that she was the surviving wife of Manuel Medeiros who, during his lifetime, was the owner of certain described real property and of a bank account containing the sum of $4,000; that the property was community property; that Mary Medeiros, as the surviving wife, is the owner of the property in fee; that the defendant John Medeiros claims to have an interest in the real property based on alleged deeds executed prior to the death of Manuel Medeiros; that the deeds were recorded after the death of Manuel Medeiros; that the claim of John Medeiros to the bank account is based on a purported assignment and gift; that the deeds and the assignment were without consideration; that the deeds and the assignment were executed without the consent of Mary Medeiros; that the deeds were never delivered; that the claims of the defendants cloud the right, title and interest of the plaintiff; and that the defendants had no right, title or interest in either the real property or the $4,000.

A second cause of action alleged that the plaintiff is and at all times was entitled to possession of the property and the $4,000 and that the defendants assert an interest in the property and that their claim is without right. Three other causes of action alleged lack of delivery, undue influence and fraud.

Prior to the trial each cause of action was amended, with leave of the court, to allege

‘ ‘

That at the time of the commencement of this action, defendants were and are now in possession of said real property and were and are now wrongfully and unlawfully withholding the same.” Thereafter a memorandum to set the cause for trial was filed. Then a demand for a jury trial was made and later a motion was filed in which the

[72]

Medeiros v. Medeiros

AI Brief

SCHOTTKY, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief