Kidder v. Stevens

Citations

• 60 Cal. 414
• 1882 Cal. LEXIS 483

Syllabus

<p>Ejectment—Pleading—Finding—Seisin—Ouster—Time.—In ejectment the complaint averred seisin in fee on the first day of June, 1879, and an ouster on the same day; and it was found by the Court that the plaintiff was owner in fee of the land in controversy, on the twenty-ninth of June, 1868, and conveyed the same to M. K. on the sixteenth of November, 1875; that M. K. died testate in May, 1879; that his executor leased to the defendant in August of the same year, and that defendant had continued to occupy the premises ever since. It was objected that there was no finding on the issue of ownership on the first day of June, 1879, the date of the seisin alleged in the complaint. Held: The findings cover all the material issues.</p> <p>Id.—Id.—Id.—Id.—Id.—Id.—Presumption oe Law.—A presumption of law that is disputable when not changed by evidence becomes to the Court a rule indisputable for the case, and the Court is bound to apply it.</p> <p>Id.—Id.—Id.—Id.—Id.—Id.—A status once established is presumed by the law to remain until the contrary appears.</p> <p>Id.—Id.—Id.—Id.—Id.—Id.—Immaterial Allegation.—The allegation of time as to seisin or ouster in our so called action of ejectment, is not material, and a denial of it raises no material issue except when the mesne profits are in question.</p> <p>Deed—Mental Incompetency.—The Court found that on the sixteenth day of November, 1875, and before and after that date, L. K. was of unsound mind—his mental unsoundness consisting of a fixed insane delusion in regard to religion, to wit: that he had incurred the displeasure of Cod, and could only expiate his sins by refraining from partaking of food; that he also during said time had occasional paroxysms of meloncholia; that on that day he signed, acknowledged and delivered to M. K. (his wife) a deed of gift of the premises in controversy; that said L. K. at the time he made and delivered the deed, understood the nature, force and effect of the act, and that said act was not th