Mahoney v. Alviso

California Supreme Court

Mahoney v. Alviso

51 Cal. 440, 1876 Cal. LEXIS 76

California Supreme Court·Decided July 1, 1876·No. No. 4781·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

By the Court:

It should have been stated in the complaint, if such were the fact, that the rents in controversy accrued subsequently [442]*442to the entry of the decree in partition, for it is upon this proposition, in the main, that the right of the plaintiffs to those rents would rest. There is no such averment found in the complaint in direct terms; nor do its allegations, fairly construed, amount to such an averment.

Judgment affirmed.

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

By the Court:

It should have been stated in the complaint, if such were the fact, that the rents in controversy accrued subsequently [442]*442to the entry of the decree in partition, for it is upon this proposition, in the main, that the right of the plaintiffs to those rents would rest. There is no such averment found in the complaint in direct terms; nor do its allegations, fairly construed, amount to such an averment.

Judgment affirmed.

Mahoney v. Alviso, 51 Cal. 440, 1876 Cal. LEXIS 76 (Cal. 1876).

Pincite

51 Cal. 440 (Mahoney v. Alviso) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related