De Flores v. Santa Cruz

California Supreme Court

De Flores v. Santa Cruz

24 P. 1026, 86 Cal. 191, 1890 Cal. LEXIS 1000

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 23, 1890

DocketNo. 13658

StatusPublished

This text of 24 P. 1026 (De Flores v. Santa Cruz) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

De Flores v. Santa Cruz, 24 P. 1026, 86 Cal. 191, 1890 Cal. LEXIS 1000 (Cal. 1890).

Pincite

Opinion

Works, J.

This is an action to set aside a deed on the ground that it had been procured by duress. There was a judgment for the plaintiff. A motion for a new trial was overruled, and the defendant appeals. It is contended that the complaint is insufficient because it does not directly allege the execution of the deed by the plaintiff. We think the complaint is sufficient in this respect, but if it were not the record shows that the demurrer to the complaint was overruled by consent, and the defect in the complaint is' cured by the answer, which alleges the execution of the deed, but denies that it was procured by duress. As there was an allegation of such a conveyance in the complaint, which is made certain by the answer, the appellant cannot be allowed to attack the complaint in this court, for the first time, on this ground. The findings support the judgment, and they are sustained by the evidence.

The judgment and order are affirmed.

Fox, J., and Paterson, J., concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Works, J.

This is an action to set aside a deed on the ground that it had been procured by duress. There was a judgment for the plaintiff. A motion for a new trial was overruled, and the defendant appeals. It is contended that the complaint is insufficient because it does not directly allege the execution of the deed by the plaintiff. We think the complaint is sufficient in this respect, but if it were not the record shows that the demurrer to the complaint was overruled by consent, and the defect in the complaint is' cured by the answer, which alleges the execution of the deed, but denies that it was procured by duress. As there was an allegation of such a conveyance in the complaint, which is made certain by the answer, the appellant cannot be allowed to attack the complaint in this court, for the first time, on this ground. The findings support the judgment, and they are sustained by the evidence.

The judgment and order are affirmed.

Fox, J., and Paterson, J., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 P. 1026, 86 Cal. 191, 1890 Cal. LEXIS 1000, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/de-flores-v-santa-cruz-cal-1890.