Amador Gold Mine, Ltd. v. Amador Gold Mine

Vanclief, C. The plaintiff, an English corporation, brought this action against the defendant, a California corporation, for a forcible detainer (as defined by section 1160 of the Code of Civil Procedure) of a certain [347]tract of mineral land on which is a quartz lode, a sixty-stamp quartz mill, and other improvements, situate in the county of Amador.

The complaint consists of two counts—the first, under the second division of section 1160, alleging an unlawful entry upon said premises on July 14, 1893, in the absence of plaintiff, and a refusal to surrender possession for the period of five days after demand by plaintiff for such surrender; and the second, under the first division of said section, alleging that the defendants, by force and with strong hand and threats of violence, unlawfully holds and keeps possession of said land and appurtenances.

The answer of defendants to the first count denies that plaintiff was ever entitled to the possession of any part of the premises described in "the complaint, and denies that on July 14,1893, or at any time within five days previous thereto, plaintiff was in peaceable or actual possession or occupation of any part of said premises, as alleged in the complaint.

In answer to the second count defendants deny that. the corporation defendant has ever unlawfully, or with force or threats of violence held or kept possession of said premises, or any part thereof, at any time since July 14, 1893, “contrary to the form of the statute.”

After the close of the evidence, and by leave of the court, defendants amended their answer to each count of the complaint by inserting the following: “ That on the first day of May, 1893, said defendant, Amador Gold Mine, as was its right, did peaceably and quietly enter upon said pieces and parcels of land, and all thereof, and thence hitherto has continued to be and now is in the peaceable and quiet possession of said pieces and parcels of land and all thereof.”

The cause having been tried without a jury, the court found for plaintiff on both counts of the complaint, and rendered judgment for restitution of possession and for treble damages, amounting to four hundred and fifty dollars.

[348]