Naddy v. Dietze

Citations

• 15 S.D. 26
• 86 N.W. 753
• 1901 S.D. LEXIS 76

Syllabus

<p>1. Where the trial court in an action to quiet title found that plaintiff was not the owner or entitled to the possession of the property, and an appeal was taken merely from the judgment, without exceptions to the findings or motion for a new trial, plaintiff could not object that the findings were incomplete, because not stating the specific evidentiary facts; there being nothing in the record to indicate that any proof of such facts was given.</p> <p>2. In an action to quiet title, where the complaint merely alleged generally that plaintiff was the owner and entitled to possession of the property, a finding that plaintiff was not the owner or entitled to possession was sufficient, without a finding of the specific facts on which the plaintiff relied.</p> <p>3. Findings of fact cannot be objected to on appeal, for insufficiency, where no request for further findings was made at the trial.</p> <p>i. Where defendant in an action to quiet title alleged that plaintiff had abandoned the property, and the court found generally that plaintiff had no title or right to possession, a finding on the question of abandonment could not have benefitted plaintiff, and hence a failure to find on that issue was not prejudical error.</p>