Pico v. Phelan (1888) · DecisionDepot

Pico v. Phelan

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

California Supreme Court Sep 22, 1888 No. No. 12361Published

Before: Hayne

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the defendant was not a tenant of the plaintiff and that the defendant's possession of the property was adverse, precluding the plaintiff's claim for rent.

Issues

Whether a landlord-tenant relationship existed between the parties for the year 1882.
Whether the defendant's possession of the property was adverse to the plaintiff.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The court found that there was no relation of landlord and tenant between the parties; and we think that the evidence shows that the possession of defendant was adverse to the plaintiff.”

Synopsis

Appeal for a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, and from an order refusing a new trial.

The facts are stated in the opinion'.

Hayne, C. Action to recover rent of certain real property for the 1882. It was admitted that there was no agreement for that year. The theory of plaintiff was that defendant was formerly his tenant and held over. The court found that there was no relation of landlord and tenant between the parties; and we think that the evidence shows that the possession of defendant was adverse to the plaintiff. There was no error in law or abuse of discretion.

We therefore advise that the judgment and order denying a new trial be affirmed.

Foote, C., and Belcher, C. C., concurred.

The Court. For the reasons given in the foregoing opinion, the judgment and order are affirmed.

Pico v. Phelan

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief