Pico v. Phelan

California Supreme Court

Pico v. Phelan

19 P. 186, 77 Cal. 86, 1888 Cal. LEXIS 628

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedSeptember 22, 1888

DocketNo. 12361

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 19 P. 186 (Pico v. Phelan) 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

Pico v. Phelan, 19 P. 186, 77 Cal. 86, 1888 Cal. LEXIS 628 (Cal. 1888).

Pincite

Opinion

Hayne, C.

Action to recover rent of certain real property for the 1882. It was admitted that there was no agreement for that year. The theory of plaintiff was that defendant was formerly his tenant and held over. The court found that there was no relation of landlord and tenant between the parties; and we think that the evidence shows that the possession of defendant was adverse to the plaintiff. There was no error in law or abuse of discretion.

We therefore advise that the judgment and order denying a new trial be affirmed.

Foote, C., and Belcher, C. C., concurred.

The Court.

For the reasons given in the foregoing opinion, the judgment and order are affirmed.

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