Pico v. Phelan

Decided September 22, 1888

California Supreme Court · decided 1888-09-22

Appeal for a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion'.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1888-09-22

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently November 1955

2 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

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 →

Hayne, C.

¶1Action 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.

¶2We therefore advise that the judgment and order denying a new trial be affirmed.

¶3Foote, C., and Belcher, C. C., concurred.

The Court.

¶4For the reasons given in the foregoing opinion, the judgment and order are affirmed.