Hoffman v. Felt

California Supreme Court

Hoffman v. Felt

1 Cal. Unrep. 369

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 23, 1867

DocketNo. 1317

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Cal. Unrep. 369 (Hoffman v. Felt) 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

Hoffman v. Felt, 1 Cal. Unrep. 369 (Cal. 1867).

Pincite

Opinion

SANDERSON, J.

It was not error to nonsuit the plaintiffs upon the opening statement of their counsel. The plaintiffs cannot recover in ejectment without title, or prior possession, which is evidence of title. According to the statement of counsel the plaintiffs have neither. What other remedy they may have is not involved in this case.

Judgment affirmed.

We concur: Shatter, J.; Rhodes, J.; Currey, C. J.

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

SANDERSON, J.

It was not error to nonsuit the plaintiffs upon the opening statement of their counsel. The plaintiffs cannot recover in ejectment without title, or prior possession, which is evidence of title. According to the statement of counsel the plaintiffs have neither. What other remedy they may have is not involved in this case.

Judgment affirmed.

We concur: Shatter, J.; Rhodes, J.; Currey, C. J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Cal. Unrep. 369, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hoffman-v-felt-cal-1867.