
    WHITE et al., EXECUTORS OF OLIVER B. White, v. MOSES et al.
    
    Under the system of practice in this State, a general denial is equivalent to the general issue at common law, and such a plea does not put in issue the plaintiff’s title to sue.
    Appeal from the District Court of the Twelfth Judicial District, County of San Francisco.
    Plaintiffs, as executors of O. B. White, deceased, commenced an action of ejectment against defendants for seven-sixteenths of a certain fifty vara lot in San Francisco. Defendants answered, denying generally the ■ allegations of the complaint, and setting up title in J. T. Limantour.
    A nonsuit was entered, on the ground that the plaintiffs had not established their character as executors, and afterwards, on the application of the plaintiffs, the judgment of nonsuit was vacated and a new trial granted. From this order defendants appealed.
    
      J. P. Treadwell for Appellants.
    
      Wm. W. Crane, jr., for Respondents.
   Terry, C. J., after stating the facts, delivered the opinion of the Court

Baldwin, J., concurring.

Under the pleadings of the case, no proof of the appointment of plaintiffs as executors was necessary. Under our system of practice, a general denial is equivalent to the general issue at common law, and it does not put in issue the plaintiff’s title to sue. (See 5 Phil. Ev. 359 ; 15 Johns. 208.)

Judgment affirmed.  