1. REFERENCE TO TAKE AN ACCOUNT.-Where the taking of an account is required, it is in the discretion of the Court to take the account, or to refer it to a Commissioner or referee to state It. Hidden v. Jordan, 301.
See BOND, 1; JOINDER OF ACTIONS, 1; COMPLAINT, 1; LOST NOTE, 1; ESTATES OF DECEASED PERSONS, 7; APPEARANCE, 1; PARTIES TO ACTION, 1.
ACTIONS TO QUIET TITLE.
See EQUITY, 1, 2; TITLE, 3.
See PLEADINGS, 5; Probate Court, 1, 4, 5, 6; EQUITY, 4; ESTATES OF DECEASED PERSONS, 7, 8.
ADVERSE POSSESSION.
See POSSESSION, 2; EVIDENCE, 6; REPLEVIN, 1, 2
1. BEACH AND WATER LOTS OF SAN FRANCISCO. The Act of March 26th, 1851, making provision for the disposition of the beach and water lot property of San Francisco, operated as a confirmation of all " Ayuntamiento sales" and "Alcalde grants" of sald property theretofore made, and upon the passage of said Act the title of the grantees and their successors in interest related back to the date of the sale or grant. Seabury v. Arthur, 142.
2. SAME. Where there had been more than one grant of any portion of said property before the passage of the Act by an Alcalde in the usual mode, or in pursuance of a sale, or by order of the Ayuntamiento, the confirmation by relation attached to the oldest grant, and vested the title in the grantee of such eldest grant. Id.
See TRANSFER OF CASES TO FEDERAL COURTS, 1.
1. DEBT OF AMADOR COUNTY TO CALAVERAS COUNTY.-The Act of 1855 organiz-
Ing Amador County out of a part of the territory of Calaveras County, and
compelling the former to pay a portion of the debt of the latter, does not
require Amador County to pay interest on its proportion of the debt due to
the County of Calaveras. Beals v. Supervisors, 449.
AMENDMENTS.
Bee COMPLAINT, 3, 4, 5, 6, 1, 8.
1. FORM OF DENIAL IN ANSWER.- If an allegation of a complaint consists of
several clauses or propositions connected by the copulative conjunction
"and," a denial of the entire allegation is evasive and insufficient. Each
proposition should be separately denied. More v. Del Valle, 170.
2. ORDER STRIKING OUT ANSWER AFTER TRIAL. If an answer is filed, raising an
issue or issues, and a trial is had, and witnesses are sworn and examined,
and the Court takes the case into consideration, it cannot then strike out
the answer of the defendant and enter his default, and render judgment for
plaintiff for the amount claimed in the complaint. Abbott v. Douglass, 295.
8. AN ANSWER STRICKEN OUT.- An answer, notwithstanding an order to strike
it out, is still entitled to its place in the judgment roll. Id.
See FORCIBLE ENTRY AND Detainer, 2; JUDGMENTS, 7; PLEADINGS, 6.
1. WHAT AN APPEAL FROM A JUDGMENT INCLUDES.-If, on the rendition of a final
judgment, the Court also grants a perpetual injunction, and an appeal is
taken from the whole judgment, the injunction is included in the appeal.
McGarrahan v. Maxwell, 75.
2. APPEAL IN ACTION FOR PARTITION.-An appeal does not lie from an inter-
locutory judgment, rendered in an action for partition, determining the
interest of the several parties and appointing a referee to make a partition
and report the same to the Court. Gates v. Salmon, 320.
3. RETROACTIVE EFFECT OF ACT ALLOWING APPEALS-The Act of March 23d, 1864,
allowing an appeal from a judgment in cases of partition, "which deter-
mines the right of the several parties and directs partition to be made," is
not retroactive so as to apply to such judgments which had already been en-
tered. Id.
4. TIME WITHIN WHICH APPEAL MUST BE TAKEN. An appeal from a judgment
must be taken within one year from the time of its rendition. The failure
of the Clerk to enter the judgment in the Judgment Book at the time it is
rendered, cannot extend the time within which to appeal. Gray v. Palmer,
416.
5 SAME. The question whether an appeal from a judgment should not be taken
within one year from the time when the order for judgment is made and
entered in the minutes of the Court, discussed. Id.
6. APPEALS FROM ORDERS.- The questions discussed in the opinion as to the time
within which appeals must be taken from various orders. Id.
7. PAPERS TO BE USED ON APPEAL.- District Courts have no Jurisdiction to de-
termine what papers may be used on appeal to the Supreme Court. Beek-
man v. Whitney, 555.
8. APPEAL FROM ORDER SUPPLYING LOST RECORD.-If either party is dissatisfied
with an order of the District Court in supplying a lost record, it may be
reviewed by an appeal from the order.
9. IF LOST RECORD NOT SUPPLIED NO APPEAL CAN BE TAKEN.-If the record or a
portion of it in the District Court has been lost, and either party desires to
appeal, an order of the District Court reciting that copies of the lost papers
have been furnished, and directing that such coples may be used on appeal
to the Supreme Court, is not an order substituting and supplying the lost
record, and there is no record in the District Court from which a transcript
on appeal can be taken. Id.
10. Loss oF MATERIAL PORTIONS OF A STATEMENT.- If material portions of the
statement on motion for new trial or of the papers referred to in the state-
ment have been lost, and are not supplied and substituted by the District
Court, an appeal from the order denying a new trial will be dismisser.
Id.
See PRACTICE, 1, 2, 3, 6, 7; EVIDENCE, 1; COSTS, 1; JURISDICTION, 2, 8; MAN-
DAMUS, 7; JUDGMENTS, 18; COURT COMMISSIONERS, 2.
1. AN APPEARANCE IN AN ACTION.- A notice given by an attorney on behalf of
defendant to plaintiff's attorney that defendant will move before a Court
Commissioner that an attachment issued in the case be dissolved, does not
constitute an appearance in the action. Glidden v. Packard, 649.
1. ENTERING ON THE ASSESSMENT ROLL PROPERTY NOT ASSESSED.- -The Rev-
enue Act of 1861 does not authorize the Board of Equalization of a county
to add to the assessment roll other property than that assessed by the
Assessor. The Board may require the Assessor to enter on the assessment
roll other property which has not been assessed; but when entered by the
Assessor, he and not the Board must give it a proper valuation. People v.
Reynolds, 110.
2. CHANGING ASSESSED Value of ProPERTY BY THE BOARD.- The Board for the
equalization of taxes cannot under the Revenue Act of 1861 diminish or
increase the assessed value of property as fixed by the Assessor, unless com-
plaint has first been made to them, and reasonable notice has been given to
the party assessed or interested of the day when they will act in the case.
Id.
8. ADDING TO THE ASSESSED VALUE OF PROPERTY.- The Board for the equaliza-
tion of taxes cannot under the Revenue Act of 1861 add to the valuation of
property, as fixed by the Assessor, without evidence authorizing them to
do so. Id.
4. POWER OF BOARD TO MAKE A NEW ASSESSMENT.- If the Assessor fixes the
assessed value of the property of a person or firm, and the Board of Equall
zation afterwards, instead of adding to the valuation of the property so
assessed, makes a new assessment, this new assessment is vold, even if the
party interested receives notice and appears and evidence is taken. Id.
5. ORDER OF BOARD INCREASING ASSESSED VALUE OF PROPERTY. An order of
the Board of Equalization adding to the assessed valuation of a person's
property, should show upon its face that it is merely increasing the valuation
of the particular property placed on the assessment roll by the Assessor.
Id.
See TAXES, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9.
See ASSESSMENT, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
1. ATTACHMENT - WHEN NOT VOID. An attachment, regular upon its face, is
not vold because the complaint does not set up a cause of action which
would warrant the issuance of an attachment. McComb v. Reed, 281.
2. FIRST AND SECOND ATTACHING CREDITORS.-Query: Where two attachments
have been levied on the same property, can the junior attaching creditor
Buccessfully attack the validity of the first on the ground that the complaint
did not contain a cause of action upon a contract express or implied for
the direct payment of money? Id.
See PLEADINGS, 9; SHERIFFS, 1, 2; SHERIFF'S JURY, 1; APPEARANCE, 1.
1. DEATH OF PRINCIPAL IN POWER OF ATTORNEY.-The death of the principal
operates as a revocation of a power of attorney to convey land, and if, after
the death of the principal, the attorney in fact makes a deed under the
power, the deed is void, even if the attorney is ignorant of the death.
Ferris v. Irving, 645.
See DISTRICT ATTORNEYS, 1.
Bee ELECTIONS, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11.
Bee MANDAMUS, 1; HABEAS CORPUS, 1, 2; CRIMINAL LAW, 28.
BAILOR AND BAILEE
See PLEADINGS, 2, 3.
See ALCALDE Grants, 1, 2.
BILL OF EXCEPTIONS.
See EXCEPTIONS, 1.
1. ACTION ON INJUNCTION BOND.- The plaintiff in an action on an injunction
bond is not entitled to a judgment for damages for expenses incurred for
attorneys' fees and in procuring testimony, unless he proves that he has
actually paid the attorney and the expenses of procuring testimony. Prader
v. Grimm et al., 11.
2. JUSTIFICATION OF SURETIES ON OFFICIAL BOND.- An official bond is not viti-
ated because the sureties swear that "they are worth the amount for
which they become liable over and above all their just debts and liabilities,"
instead of saying over and above all their debts," etc. Dorsey v. Smyth,
|