Nolan v. Hentig

[282]

CHIPMAN, C.

Unlawful detainer. This action was brought in justice’s court, claiming- twenty-five dollars rent due, also fifty dollars damages for waste and injury and detention -of the premises, and “that said damages may be trebled.” The cause was tried and judgment passed for plaintiffs, and defendants appealed to the superior court on questions of law and fact. In the superior court counsel appeared for all the defendants; no objection was made to the jurisdiction of the court over the subject-matter or parties; “the demurrer was not presented or argued before the superior court, or passed upon by the superior court, but said cause was tried upon its merits by both parties without objection of either party to the jurisdiction of the superior court, and that both parties consented to have said cause tried by the superior court.” The court filed findings, that all the allegations of the complaint are true, and all the allegations of the answer are untrue; that the true name of John Doe Craner is J. Wesley Craner; that said defendant has ¡appeared and answered in his true name, and the other defendants have answered herein; that defendants rented the premises in question “at the monthly rental of twenty-five dollars, payable in advance upon the first day of each month, and rented and occupied said premises during the months of September, October, and November, 1901”; that defendants did not pay said rent for said months, and plaintiffs, on September 3, 1901, served upon defendants a demand in writing for the payment of said rent or possession of the premises, but defendants failed and refused to pay said rent or quit said premises, and retained possession, and now hold possession thereof. As conclusions of law, the court found that plaintiffs are entitled to possession; that there is due plaintiffs from defendants the sum of twenty-five dollars rent for each of the said months of September, October, and November, 1901, and that said sums should be trebled, and for restitution of the premises. Judgment was accordingly entered. Defendants appeal from the judgment and from the order denying motion for a new trial.

1. It is urged that the justice had no jurisdiction. The cause was appealed to, and heard

de novo

in, the superior court, without objection to the jurisdiction. The judgment cannot now be questioned.