Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

2 Mont. 202

McCauley v. Gilmer

Montana Supreme Court

Decided August 15, 1874

Montana Supreme Court · decided 1874-08-15

The judgment was rendered by Wade, J. The complaint alleges that respondent is “ seized in fee ” and “ entitled to the immediate possession ” of the property in dispute. The former allegation is Immaterial, and appellants were called upon to answer as to right of possession. Boles v. Cohen, 15 Cal. 150; Sta/rJc v. Ba/rrett, id. 361; Grady v. Eaady, 18 id. 108 ; Hubbard v. Barry, 21 id. 321. No eviction is charged.

Relies on Payne & Dewey v. Treadwell

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1874-08-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently November 1953

8 state decisions

30187418801890190019101920193019401950decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Seevis, J.

¶1The complaint in this action avers : That the respondent is seized in fee and entitled to the immediate possession of certain land therein described; that appellants are in possession and withhold the same to his damage in the sum of $300.

¶2The appellants demurred to the complaint for want of sufficient facts therein stated. The demurrer was overruled hy the comt, and the appellants excepted and thereafter answered, admitting that the title was in the respondent, but denying the respondent’s right of possession, the wrongful withholding of the same, and the damages.

¶3The respondent thereupon moved for judgment upon the plead- „ ings, because the answer was sham and irrelevant. The court sustained the motion, and without a trial rendered judgment for the possession to the respondent and damages in the sum of $1.

¶4I have heretofore maintained, in a dissenting opinion in the case of Sands v. Maclay, ante, 42, that this mode of practice is improper ; but the majority of this court thought otherwise, and the same must be observed as the law until it is reversed. It only remains for us to determine the sufficiency of the pleadings in the case, which consist of the complaint and answer.

¶5IJpon an examination of all the authorities which have been *205cited by counsel, we are inclined to follow tbe ruling of tbe supreme court of California in Payne v. Treadwell, 16 Cal. 220. Tbe only facts wbieb are necessary to be alleged in a complaint of tbis character are, that tbe plaintiff is seized in fee, or for life, or for years, as tbe case may be; that tbe defendant was in tbe possession at tbe time of tbe commencement of tbe action; and that be withholds tbe possession of tbe same. The complaint in tbe case at bar contains these necessary allegations, and is therefore sufficient for tbe maintenance of this action.

¶6Tbe answer denies tbe right of tbe respondent to tbe possession, tbe wrongful withholding thereof, and the damages. These are conclusions of law, which must be derived from tbe facts that are to be proved, and do not constitute issues joined by pleading. They are, therefore, what tbe legislative assembly has denominated. sham and irrelevant. Tbe judgment' of tbe court below is affirmed.

¶7Judgment affirmed.

/2/mont/202 · .json · Public domain