the defendant:" Davison v. Savage, 6 Taunt. 121; Stephenson v. Hunter, Id. 406; Stanley v. Chappell, 8 How. Pr. 235. And this rule applies when plaintiff sues in an official character: Stanley v. Chappell, 8 How. Pr. 235; Ketchum v. Morrell, 2 N. Y. Leg. Obs. 58; but compare Christopher v. Stockholm, 5 Wend. 36. And if they sue in an official capacity, it is usual and proper that their character should be indicated: Hill v. Thacter, 2 Code R. 3; 3 How. Pr. 407. 9. Place of Trial.-The complaint is irregular unless it states the place of trial: 1 Van Santv. 203; Williams v. Wilkinson, 1 Code, R. N. S. 20; Hall v. Huntley, Id. 21. And in such case it must be amended or stricken out: Merrill v. Grinnell, 10 How. Pr. 31; Hotchkiss v. Crocker, 15 Id. 336; Davison v. Powell, 13 How. Pr. 288. It cannot be cured by reference to the summons: Id.; McKenna v. Fisk, 1 How. U. S. 211. It may be amended, but only on payment of defendant's costs: Hall v. Huntley, 1 Code, R. 21. These authorities apply more particularly to the practice in New York, though they are applicable here. 10. Real Party.-The complaint shall contain the name of the real party in interest: Cal. Code, sec. 367; 1 Van Santv. Eq. Pr. 72; see Ante Parties, p. 53. The term "parties" includes all who are directly interested in the subject matter of the action, having a right to make defense, control proceedings, examine and cross-examine witnesses, and appeal from the judgment: Robbins v. Chicago City, 4 Wallace U. S. 567. For a further definition, see Girand v. Stagg, 4 E. D. Smith, 27. 11. Titles to be Avoided.--In designating the parties to the action, except where suit is brought in an official or representative capacity, no title or other appellation is necessary. If inserted, it will be treated as mere surplusage: Sheiden v. Hoy, 11 How. Pr. 15; Root v. Price, 22 How. Pr. 372; Butterfield v. Macomber, Id. 150. 12. Venue, how Laid.-As a venue is technically necessary to every traversable fact, when it is once properly laid, all matters following refer to it: Cocke v. Kendall, Hempst. 236. It has been held, however, that a venue laid in the body of the complaint is sufficient: Dwight v. Wing, 2 McLean, 580. The proper mode in all cases will be to lay the venue in the title. No. 2. ii. Title of Cause where some of the Parties are Unknown. [STATE AND COUNTY.] [COURT.] ANDREW BLACK, Plaintiff, against CHARLES DEAN, JOHN DOE AND RICHARD ROE, Defendants. 13. Parties Known and Unknown.-In certain cases the statute authorizes the plaintiff to proceed against parties, some of whom are known and others unknown, giving the true names of such as are known, and designating the others by fictitious names, stating in the body of the complaint the reason, that "their true names are unknown." 14. Parties Unknown.-If the plaintiff should be ignorant of the name of the adverse party, he may designate him by any name, and amend, of course, at any stage of the proceedings when his true name shall become known: Cal. Code, sec. 474; N. Y. Code, sec. 175; Morgan v. Thrift, 2 Cal. 562; see also Rosecrantz v. Rogers, 40 Cal. 491; McKinlay v. Tuttle, 42 Cal. 577; Campbell v. Adams, 50 Cal. 205. But the plaintiff cannot thus use a fictitious name at his discretion; he is restricted to cases where the name of the adverse party is unknown: Crandall v. Beach, 7 How. Pr. 271; People v. Herman, 45 Cal. 692; and must aver in the pleading that the true name of the party is to the plaintiff unknown: Waterbury v. Mather, 16 Wend. 611. Where a defendant is sued as James service was returned upon John : Held to be error, unless and judgment was entered against J. there was something in the record to show that the person served was the person sued: Sutter v. Cox, 6 Cal. 415. No. 3. iii. Title of Cause.-Corporations. [STATE AND COUNTY.] [COURT.] THE MONO GOLD AND SILVER MINING COMPANY, Plaintiff, THE FORT TEJON RAILROAD COMPANY, Defendant. 15. Corporations.-A corporation cannot sue otherwise than by its corporate name: Curtis v. Murray, 26 Cal. 633; Crawford v. Collins, 30 How. Pr. 398. And a company by its firm name or title: King v. Randlett, 33 Cal. 318. In New York, a banking association may sue either in its corporate name or in the name of its president: Leonardsville Bank v. Willard, 25 N. Y. 574. This does not, however, take the place of the averments necessary in the body of the complaint, showing their official character. 16. Person. The word "person" in its legal signification is a generic term, and intended to include artificial as well as natural persons: Douglass v. Pacific M. S. S. Co., 4 Cal. 304. The statute having done away with all distinction between natural and artificial persons, and the rules of pleading applicable thereto: San Francisco Gas Co. v. The City of San Francisco, 9 Cal. 467; see, also, sec. 17, Political Code of California. 17. Name of Officer.-The action should be brought in the name of the officer, with the title of his office annexed: Paige v. Fazackerly, 36 Barb. 392. No. 5. Title and Commencement. State of California, City and County of.... ANDREW BLACK, Plaintiff, CHARLES DEAN, Defendant. In the District Court of the.......Judicial District. The plaintiff complains of the defendant, and alleges: 18. Commencement. The commencement of pleadings consists of those formal words of expressions used to introduce the subject-matter. No. 6. Commencement.-By one Suing for himself and others. The plaintiff complains on behalf of himself and of all others (judgment-creditors of the defendant), who shall in due time come in and seek relief by, and contribute to the expenses of this action, and alleges: 19. Conclusion.-The conclusion varies according to the character of the document to which it is affixed. In a complaint, it consists of the prayer for relief, signature of counsel, and verification; while in an affidavit, the signature and jurat only are required. Where two attorneys, partners, subscribe a pleading, they may sign in their firm name: Bank of Geneva v. Rice, 12 Wend. 424. And the subscription to the verification of a pleading is a sufficient subscription of the pleading: Hubbell v. Livingston, 1 Code R. 63. The Practice Act provides that every pleading shall be subscribed by the party or his attorney: Cal. Code, sec. 446; N. Y. Code, sec. 156. But an attorney in fact, who is not an attorney at law, cannot sign his name to the complaint for his principal as "plaintiff's attorney:" Dixey v. Pollock, 8 Cal. 570. No. 8. Form of Complaint, complete. State of California, City and County of.... ANDREW BLACK, Plaintiff, CHARLES DEAN, Defendant. In the District Court, The plaintiff complains of the defendant, and alleges: 1. For a first cause of action: Clerk's Certificate to Copy of Complaint. I hereby certify the foregoing to be a full, true and correct copy of the original complaint on file in my office, in the above entitled action. In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the above-named court, this......day of .......187.. No. 10. A. C., Clerk. By J. S., Deputy Clerk. Amended Complaint--Commencement. [TITLE OF CAUSE.] Plaintiff by leave of the court [or by stipulation] files this, his amended complaint, and alleges: [State cause of action as before.] [TITLE.] FORMAL PARTS OF DEFENDANT'S PLEADINGS. No. 11. The defendant demurs to the complaint [or to the first alleged cause of action in the complaint] filed herein, and for cause of demurrer alleges: I. That, etc. II. That, etc. 20. Grounds of Demurrer.-The defendant may state as many grounds or causes of demurrer as may be apparent on the face of the complaint. But each cause or ground should be distinctly alleged, and be numbered in the margin as above, and if the demurrer is sustained, plaintiff may obtain leave of court to file an amended complaint, which will take the place of the original complaint in the action. No. 12. Answer. The defendant, by G. H. his attorney, answers the complaint herein, and 1. For a first defense to the first alleged cause of action, denies : I. That, etc. 2. For a second defense to said first alleged cause of action, defendant alleges: I. That, etc. 3. For a third defense to said first alleged cause of action, defendant alleges: [Set forth facts constituting the defense, and if any of them have been alleged above, an express reference to them will suffice.] 4. And for a counter-claim to the second alleged cause of action, defendant alleges: I. That, etc. Wherefore defendant demands, etc. [stating demand on counter-claim]. G. H., Allorney for Defendant. [Verification.] 21. By J. M., his Attorney.-This may be omitted where he has served a notice of appearance; and where two attorneys are partners the firm name will suffice: Bank of Geneva v. Rice, 12 Wend. 424. 22. Demand of Relief.-No demand for relief is necessary, unless the defendant seeks some affirmative relief against the plaintiff or against a co-defendant: Averill v. Taylor, 5 How. Pr. 476. 23. Denials of Several Allegations are but one defense: Otis v. Ross, 8 How. Pr. 193; 11 N.Y. Leg. Obs. 343. So, several demands against the plaintiff available as a set-off may be pleaded in one defense. Each must, however, be distinctly described: Ramney v. Smith, 6 How. Pr. 420. 24. Distinct Defenses.-Each defense in an answer which is declared to be a distinct defense, must be complete in itself, and must contain all that is necessary to answer the whole cause of action, or that part which it professes to answer, either by express allegation or by an express reference to other |