Hyperlawhypertext legal database Uhl v. Uhl 52 Cal. 250

← Cases

Uhl v. Uhl

52 Cal. 250 Court Cal. Docket Ho. 5430 English

Contents

Majority

p. 250
[Ho. 5430.]
RACHEL UHL v. GEORGE UHL.

Headnote

-JomDEB of Actions.—The plaintiff cannot, in the complaint, unite a cause of action to annul a marriage hy reason of a former marriage of the plaintiff to one who is still alive, with a cause of action to quiet her title to her separate property, in which the defendant falsely claims an interest.
Appeal from the District Court, Sixth Judicial District, County of Sacramento.
The plaintiff alleged in her complaint that on the 5th day of December, 1860, she married the defendant, and that on the 6th day of February, 1848, she had married Joseph Marzeaux, and that the first marriage had never been annulled, and that Marzeaux was still alive.
For another cause of action she averred, that she owned separate property, both real and personal, in Sacramento, and that the defendant falsely claimed an interest in it. She asked that the second marriage be annulled, and that her title to the property be quieted. The defendant demurred, because two causes of action had been improperly united. The Court overruled the demurrer. The Court annulled the marriage and quieted the title to the property.
John Hoard, for the Appellant.
L. 8. Taylor and Curtis & Clunie, for the Respondent.

The demurrer to the complaint should have been sustained, on the ground that several causes of action were improperly united. The action is to annul the marriage between plaintiff and defendant, on the ground that when it was solemnized the plaintiff was already a married woman, her first husband being still alive. If the plaintiff, as the complaint avers, possessed a separate estate, consisting of real and personal property, there were no property rights founded upon or growing out of the illegal marriage with which the Court could deal in annulling the marriage. If the defendant falsely and fraudulently asserts some

p. 251
claim to this property, as the complaint alleges, the plaintiff must seek relief in an independent action, and cannot unite this with an action to have the marriage annulled and declared to be void.

Judgment and order reversed, and cause remanded, with an order to the Court below to sustain the demurrer to the amended complaint. Bemittitur forthwith.