Mahoney v. Alviso

California Supreme Court July 1, 1876

Mahoney v. Alviso, 51 Cal. 440 (Cal. 1876)

1876 Cal. LEXIS 76

Opinion of the Court

By the Court:

It should have been stated in the complaint, if such were the fact, that the rents in controversy accrued subsequently *442to the entry of the decree in partition, for it is upon this proposition, in the main, that the right of the plaintiffs to those rents would rest. There is no such averment found in the complaint in direct terms; nor do its allegations, fairly construed, amount to such an averment.

Judgment affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name: ANTONIO L. MAHONEY and J. H. MAHONEY v. VALENTINE ALVISO, JOSEFA ALVISO and ISHAM CASE
Cited By: 1 case
Status: Published
Syllabus: Effect of Dkcbee in Pabtition on Bjsnt;s.—If one of several tenants in common leases a portion of the common property to a tenant, and after the lease is made suit for partition is commenced and a decree entered which assigns to another of the tenants in common the land leased, the decree does not pass to the latter the rent of the leased land unless such rent falls due after the decree is made.