
    WHITE v. MOSES et al.
    
    In an action of ejectment, a juror who has formed an opinion adverse to the validity of title under which defendants claimed, is an incompetent juror.
    Appeal from the District Court of the Twelfth Judicial District, County of San Francisco.
    This was an action of ejectment to recover a lot of land. The defendants claimed title through one J. F. Limantour, who claimed to be the grantee -under the Mexican government.
    On the trial, one William H. Graham was called as a juror, and was challenged for cause, by the defendants. On examination, touching his competency as a juror, Graham testified that he was acquainted with the claim of title by Limantour. That he knew nothing of the facts of such title except from his reading of the newspapers; that he had formed and expressed an opinion in respect to the facts of such claim; that such opinion was decided, and would require testimony to remove it. Another juror, Rosenbaum, on his examination respecting his qualification, testified that he had formed an opinion adverse to the Limantour claim which would require testimony to remove; that he had always looked upon the claim as fraudulent, &c.
    These persons were admitted by the Court as competent jurors: defendants excepted. Plaintiff had judgment, and defendants appealed.
    
      J. P. Treadwell for Appellants.
    
      William W. Crane, jr., for Respondent.
   Terry, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court

Baldwin, J., concurring.

The jurors, Graham and Rosenbaum, having formed an opinion adverse to the validity of the title under which defendants claimed, were incompetent to sit in the case, and the acceptance of those jurors against the objection of defendants was error.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered.  