Cheda v. Bodkin
Before: Melvin
Synopsis
Pleading—Allegation op Ownership—Setting Out Chain op Title. As a general rule, where a pleader sets forth his chain of title and upon that chain pleads ownership, the allegation of ownership becomes a mere conclusion of law.
Easements—Single Ownership op Several Tracts—Conveyance op Separate Tract.—Where the owner of one heritage consisting of several parts has so adapted them that one derives a benefit from the other, when he sells one of them without making mention of the incidental burdens of one in respect to the other, an implied understanding arises that the burdens and correlative advantages shall continue as before the separation of the title.
Id.—Injunction — Right to Water Supply — Plea op Plaintiff's Ownership—Trial op Issue as to Ownership.—In this action to enjoin the defendants from interfering with an asserted easement to have a certain supply of water flow from the lands of defendants to and upon plaintiff’s property and for damages for the cutting of water-pipes, a distinct allegation in the complaint of the plaintiff’s ownership of the easement, standing alone, and on which issue was joined and the trial had, is held to be a sufficient averment of the ultimate fact that the plaintiff owned the easement, and not a mere conclusion from the plea of his chain of title. This being the issue tried, the defendants were not misled, under the circumstances of the case, even if it be conceded that the creation of the easement was alleged in one way and proven in another.
Id.—Quasi Easements—Severance of Tracts Under Terms of Will. Quasi ea_sements which a testator has apportioned to various tracts during his lifetime, ripen into easements in favor of or burdens upon such parcels of land at their severance under the terms of such testator’s will.
Id.—Transfer of Land Passes Easements—Devise.—Section 1104 of ' the Civil Code, providing that a “transfer” of real property passes all easements attached thereto, is applicable in the matter of the creation of easements to a devise of land as well as to a transfer inter vinos. As there used, the word “transfer” should be given a general rather than a technical meaning.
Id.—Intention to Convey Easement.—The general rule is that the doctrine of implied easements is not limited to cases of direct conveyance by deed of the common owner, but applies also to property devised by will to different parties. The intention, in view of all of the circumstances, is the cardinal subject for inquiry.
Id.—Unity of Title—Extinguishment of Easement.—In order that unity of title to two estates should extinguish an existing easement, the ownership of the two estates should be coextensive, equal in validity, quality, and all other characteristics.
Id.—Landlord and Tenant — Void Attornment to Stranger.—The attornment of a tenant to a stranger, made without the knowledge of the landlord, is void.
Id.—Tenant’s Use of Water After Void Attornment—Adverse Possession—Statute of Limitations.—The use and possession of the water by a tenant of the owner of the dominant estate, after an attornment by such tenant to the owner of the servient estate which was void because made without the knowledge of the landlord, was the use and possession of the landlord, and the statute of limitations did not begin to run against the right of the owner of the dominant estate until the physical assertion of an adverse right by the owner of the servient estate.
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)