Mahoney v. Aurrecochea
Synopsis
Effect of Decbeis in Paetition.—If one of several tenants in common gives a lease of a portion of the common property, with an agreement to receive a portion of the crop for the rent, ancl after the lease is made a suit for partition is commenced, and a decree of partition is entered in which the leased land is assigned to another of the tenants in common, the decree does not pass to the latter the portion of the crop to be received as rent, unless it is harvested before the decree is entered.
Judicial Notice.—Courts will take judicial notice of the time of harvest in the counties where they preside.
By the Court: Assuming in favor of the plaintiff, that the decree in partition operated an assignment to the female plaintiff of all the rights which Aurrecochea held under the agreement made with the defendant Case, it is not in terms averred in the complaint that the crop was harvested after the entry of the decree in partition. If it was harvested before that time, the plaintiffs have no claim to that portion of it which Case had agreed to deliver to Aurrecochea. As to how the fact was in this respect, cannot be satisfactorily ascertained by construction of the exceedingly loose averments found in the complaint—even when aided by resort to notice which courts will take as to the time of harvest in the country.
Judgment affirmed.
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)