Owen v. Morton

Citations

• 24 Cal. 373

Syllabus

<p>Possession of one Tenant in Common.—Where one tenant in common is in the exclusive possession of land, the presumption of law is that he holds for himself and his co-tenant, and, to rehut such presumption, there must he proof of acts or declarations on his part indicating his intention to exclude his co-tenant.</p> <p>What amounts to Ouster of Co-Tenant.—To enable the tenant out of possession to maintain ejectment against the co-tenant in the exclusive possession of the land, it is not necessary to prove an actual ouster j but proof that the tenant in possession appropriates the entire use or profits of the land, under a claim of exclusive right, or with a manifest intent to possess the whole exclusively, is sufficient.</p> <p>Same.—Any act of the co-tenant in the exclusive possession which manifests an intention on his part to hold exclusively for himself, is equivalent, in law, to an actual ouster.</p> <p>What does amount to Ouster of Co-Tenant.—Proof that the co-tenant is in the exclusive possession, and that he does not claim, by deed or lease from his co-tenant out of possession, is not sufficient to show an ouster or adverse possession.</p> <p>Findings of Fact—When presumed Correct.—When the record shows that all the evidence introduced on the trial is not embodied in the statement, the presumption is that the findings and judgment of the Court below are warranted by the evidence, although the statement contains no evidence upon which to base such findings and judgment.</p> <p>Same.—Every intendment is in favor of the verdict or decision of the Court below, and it will be presumed that the omitted evidence warranted the judgment.</p> <p>Proof Necessary to Recover in Ejectment.—In order to entitle a plaintiff in ejectment to recover, he must show a right of possession in himself and a possession in the defendant of the demanded premises at the time the action is brought.</p>