title:
Bellingham Bay and British Columbia Railroad Company, Plaintiff in error vs H B Strand, Defendant in error, Reply of Plaintiff in error.
title:
633
creator:
Bellingham Bay and British Columbia Railroad Company
contributor:
C. W. Dorr
date:
1890-01-13
publisher:
Washington State Supreme Court
type:
Civil
subject:
Real Property
language:
eng
format:
application/pdf
description:
Prior History: Error to District Court, Whatcom County.Justice of the Peace – Pleading – Forcible Entry and Detainer – Evidence – In an action for forcible entry and detainer, an answer alleging that defendant had been in the quiet possession of the premised for more than one year preceding the filing of the complaint, but which fails to allege that defendant’s estate in the premises had not ended, is insufficient under the provisions of § 1836, Code Wash. T.The failure of plaintiff to reply to the defendant’s allegation of quiet possession for more than one year, in an action before a justice of the peace, cannot be regarded as an admission of its truth, as, under § 1757, Code Wash. T., all new matters in the answer constituting a defense, except set-off, are presumed to be denied.In such an action, no question of title being involved, there was no error in excluding evidence that defendant had paid taxes on the premises in controversy for two years last past, no other proof of possession right of possession being offered by defendant.It was assigned as error that the court erred in excluding evidence “ that during the two years las past, defendant had been in the actual, open and notorious possession of large portions of the said tract of several hundreds acres of land which originally included the said land in controversy.” Held, that such evidence was irrelevant to the issue in an action of forcible entry and detainer.Where plaintiff proved his quiet and lawful possession for a long time prior to and up to the time of the alleged forcible entry, and defendant offered no evidence of its right of possession, and none in contravention of plaintiff’s proof, while its answer admitted it was in possession of the premises at the commencement of the action, the evidence will sustain a verdict in favor of plaintiff.
relation:
Bellingham B. & B. C. R. Co. v. Strand, 1 Wash. 133 (1890)
relation:
23 P. 928
rights:
These materials are public records. Please see Washington State Court Rules: General Rules 31 for details https://www.courts.wa.gov/court_rules/pdf/GR/GA_GR_31_00_00.pdf
