Shaeffer v. Matzen (1881) · DecisionDepot

Shaeffer v. Matzen

Name: California Superior Court Tentative Rulings
Creator: DecisionDepot
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

California Supreme Court Nov 15, 1881 No. No. 7,994Published

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the trial court erred in denying a nonsuit because the plaintiff failed to provide evidence that the defendant was in possession of the land at the commencement of the ejectment action.

Issues

Whether the trial court erred in refusing to grant a nonsuit in an ejectment action where there was no proof of defendant's possession at the commencement of the action.

Disposition. reversed and remanded

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The Court erred in refusing to grant a nonsuit in this case.”

“The action was ejectment, and there was no proof of possession by defendant at the commencement of the action.”

“The -finding that the defendant took possession of the land sued for, prior to the commencement of the action, and had ever since held the same, was not sustained by the evidence.”

Synopsis

Appeal from a judgment for the plaintiff, and from an order denying a new trial, in the Superior Court of Butte County. Hundley, J.

The Court: The Court erred in refusing to grant a nonsuit in this case. The action was ejectment, and there was no proof of possession by defendant at the commencement of the action. The motion for a nonsuit was made on the ground that there was no such proof, and it should have been granted.

The -finding that the defendant took possession of the land sued for, prior to the commencement of the action, and had ever since held the same, was not sustained by the evidence.

For these errors the judgment and order denying a new trial are reversed, and the cause remanded.

Shaeffer v. Matzen

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief