Busenius v. Coffee

Citations

• 14 Cal. 91
• 1859 Cal. LEXIS 245

Syllabus

<p>Azr allegation, in a verified complaint, that “defendants wrongfully and unlawfully entered upon and dispossessed ” plaintiff, is not sufficiently denied by a denial that “ defendants wrongfully and unlawfully entered and dispossessed ” plaintiff, because such denial admits entry and ouster.</p> <p>Where, in such case, the defendants deny ownership in plaintiff, and set up ownership in themselves, it is not error to instruct the jury that the only question for them to determine is as to who has the better right to the premises. Such instruction does not imply that plaintiffs can recover, even if they do not establish, prima facie, a title.</p> <p>For error in refusing to give an instruction to the jury, the Supreme Court will not undertake to determine how far the party excepting was prejudiced, but will reverse the judgment.</p>