Castro v. Barry

Citations

• 79 Cal. 443
• 21 P. 946
• 1889 Cal. LEXIS 750

Syllabus

<p>Quieting Title—Action to Determine Adverse Claim—Complaint. — A complaint which alleges that the plaintiff is the owner of the property, that the defendant claims an interest therein adversely to the plaintiff, that such claim is without right, and that defendant has no right, title, or interest in the property, is sufficient in an action to determine an adverse claim. And such a complaint is not vitiated by unnecessary allegations as to the nature of the defendant’s claim.</p> <p>Id. —Nature of Defendant’s Claim. — It is not necessary that the defendant’s claim should be of any particular nature or character. Even if he makes no claim, he must file a disclaimer, and judgment may be entered against him, though in case of a disclaimer the judgment must not be for costs.</p> <p>Ib.—Allegations as to Nature or Dependant’s Claim, or as to its Apparent Validity. — It not being necessary that the defendant’s claim should be of any particular nature or character, it is not necessary that the complaint should set forth its nature or character, or state facts showing its apparent validity. Distinction in this regard between actions under the statute to determine adverse claims and suits to remove a cloud upon title.</p> <p>Who may Maintain the Action — Holder op Equitable Right. — It seems that if the legal title had passed from the plaintiff to the defendant by reason of a mistake in the description of a deed between the parties, the mistake could not have been corrected in an action to determine an adverse claim, because the action cannot be maintained against the holder of the legal title by one who has a mere equitable right.</p> <p>Description in Deed—Courses and Distances — Visible Boundaries. — Courses and distances are controlled by visible boundaries. Hence where there is such a boundary, a mistake in the course is a harmless error.</p>