gno.law

Rogers v. Hackett

California Supreme Court · No. 4,159 · 1874-07-01 · Published · 49 Cal. 121

N. S. ROGERS v. JOHN HACKETT and JESSE HACKETT

Area
civil

Analysis

No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.

Opinion

By the Court:

The Court erred in rendering judgment upon the pleadings. It appears from the answer that the time during which the defendant was entitled to occupy the land under the terms of the agreement set forth had not expired when the demand for possession was made. This fact, if proven, would constitute a complete defense to the action; whatever *124construction may be given to the agreement, as being a lease or otherwise, is a point which it is unnecessary to consider.

Judgment reversed, and cause remanded for a new trial. Remittitur forthwith.