O'Connor v. Frasher
This text of 53 Cal. 435 (O'Connor v. Frasher) 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.
Opinion
The demurrer to the defendants’ pleading should have been sustained. It is impossible to determine from the face of the [436]*436pleading what portion of it was intended to constitute a legal defense to the cause of action averred in the complaint, and what portion was intended as a cross-complaint.
Treating the whole pleading as a cross-complaint, the demurrer should have been sustained. (Thomas v. Lawlor, ante, p. 405.)
Finally, even if we were authorized to say that the denials (separated from the other matter) made issues at law, the Court did not find upon such issues, but only found probative facts which were not necessarily conclusive of such issues. (Coveny v. Hale, 49 Cal. 552.)
Judgment and order reversed, and cause remanded for a new trial.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
53 Cal. 435, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oconnor-v-frasher-cal-1879.