73 P. 411 | Utah | 1903
This is an action of ejectment. The answer denies the alleged title of the plaintiff, pleads the statutes of limitation, and also alleges, in substance, that the said D. P. Tarpey on the 26th day of April, 1890, entered into an agreement to sell the premises described in the complaint to one A. H. Snow while the defendant, Andrew Madsen, was in open and notorious possession of the same; that on the 25th of April, 1891, the said Snow commenced an action of ejectment
The defendant made a motion for a new trial, on the grounds, among others, of the misconduct of the jury, and accident and surprise which ordinary prudence could not have guarded against. The motion was denied, and the appellant has assigned this as error.
2. The appellant claims that the agreement between him and Snow, set up in the answer, was made as a compromise of Snow’s ejectment suit, and, as
It is ordered that the judgment be reversed, with costs, and the case remanded for a new trial in accordance with this opinion, and that leave be granted to the defendant to amend his answer.