Snodgrass v.Parks

Citations

• 79 Cal. 55
• 21 P. 429
• 1889 Cal. LEXIS 669

Syllabus

<p>Action to Qoiet Title — Parties—Defense.—In an action to quiet title against an unfounded claim of the defendants, a mortgagee of the defendants is not a necessary party. If the defendants are asserting an unfounded claim to the property, they cannot defend an action of this kind upon the ground that some one else is doing the same thing.</p> <p>Id, — Vendor and Purchaser — Contract of Plaintiff to Convey Title —Rescission — Abandonment. —The contract of plaintiff to convey the premises to a third party is no objection to an action by plaintiff, who is the holder of the legal title, to quiet and protect the title against the defendants, who have broken and abandoned a previous contract on their part to purchase the same premises. No rescission of such prior contract is necessary, if the defendants have acknowledged their inability to pay for the land, and voluntarily abandoned the contract.</p> <p>Id.—Homestead Claim of Purchaser. ■—A homestead claim of the wife of a purchaser, filed upon property held under a contract of sale which has not been complied with, hut has been abandoned for inability to pay the purchase-money, is lost with the loss of the rights of the purchaser under the contract. Such homestead claim does not give any new title, nor strengthen or enlarge the one existing, and is no defense to an action to quiet title against the purchaser after he has abandoned the contract.</p> <p>Id. — Landlord and Tenant — Pleading — Findings.—In an action to quiet title, the defendants cannot claim any protection as tenants of the plaintiffs unless such tenancy is pleaded in the answer. A finding as to rights of the defendants under a contract of tenancy not pleaded is outside the issues, and must he disregarded.</p> <p>Id,— Evidence—Contract of Purchase—Tenancy—Abandonment of Purchase—Forfeiture—Waiver of Vendor’s Lien. — Evidence is competent, in an action to quiet title, to show that defendants who had contracted to purchase the land from the plaintiffs had