From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mayo v. Madden

Supreme Court of California
Jan 1, 1854
4 Cal. 27 (Cal. 1854)

Opinion

         Appeal from the District Court of the Sixth Judicial District.

         Mayo filed his complaint, praying for the recovery of the possession of land in the City of Sacramento, and damages for the detention of the land and for forcible eviction and expulsion from it, and for the value of improvements erected upon it by him.

         Defendant demurred to the complaint, because several causes of action had been united in it. The Court sustained the demurrer, and the plaintiff appealed.

         COUNSEL

          Winans & Hyer, for Appellant.

          Crockett & McKune, for Respondent. (Cited Statutes 1851, p. 59, Sec. 64.)


         JUDGES: Mr. J. Heydenfeldt delivered the opinion of the Court. Mr. Ch. J. Murray concurred.

         OPINION

          HEYDENFELDT, Judge

         In this action there is united a claim for damages for a personal tort, and a demand properly cognizable in a court of equity. Whatever may be the liberality claimed for our present practice, it certainly cannot be extended to such a misjoinder as this declaration contains.

         The judgment on demurrer, is affirmed, with leave to the plaintiff to amend.

         Let the cause be remanded.


Summaries of

Mayo v. Madden

Supreme Court of California
Jan 1, 1854
4 Cal. 27 (Cal. 1854)
Case details for

Mayo v. Madden

Case Details

Full title:MAYO, Appellant, v. JOHN F. MADDEN, Respondent

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Jan 1, 1854

Citations

4 Cal. 27 (Cal. 1854)

Citing Cases

Gates v. Kieff

Restitution, and trespass, and damage, cannot be joined with a prayer for equitable relief, and an inspection…

Gary v. Eastabrook

The excess over $ 5,000 cannot be localized. (Jackson v. May, 16 Johns. 184; Cook v. McChristian , 4…