In the District Court of the Seventeenth Judicial District of the State of California in and for the County of Los Angeles

A. J. Kraszynski
Plaintiff
Vs.
The Los Angeles Petroleum Refining Company
Defendants

ANSWER TO AMENDED COMPLAINT (filed August 5, 1874)
Now comes the defendant and for answers to the amended complaint herein filed says:

The defendant denies that the plaintiff is now or ever has been the owner of the premises described in the complaint, but alleges that he, the said plaintiff, is now and was at all times set forth in the said complaint the lessee of said premises holding possession of the same under a lease from one Adam Malazewski.

Defendant further denies that it, the said defendant, by and through its duly authorized or employed agents or in any other manner on the 31st day of December 1873, or at any other time, had or obtained the simple sufferance or permission of plaintiff to enter upon said premises, and defendant denies that it entered upon said premises upon the simple consent, sufferance, or permission of the plaintiff.

And defendant further denies that it now holds possession of the premises described in the complaint upon the consent, sufferance, or permission of plaintiff.

And defendant further denies that it is indebted to the plaintiff for the use or occupation of said premises in any sum whatsoever.

And the defendant further denies that the plaintiff hath been damaged by any acts or omissions of defendant in the premises in the sum of one thousand dollars or in any sum whatsoever.

And for further answer defendant alleges the three facts on the premises to be, That on the 24th day of October 1873 one Adam Malazewski was the owner of the premises described in the complaint and that on that day for value described did sell the said premises to wit: the said two acres therein described as occupied by defendant and did give his certain contract in writing duly executed by him to execute and deliver all necessary deeds for said two acres to defendant under which contract this defendant entered upon said two acres and proceeded to erect large furnaces and other works for the purpose of refining crude petroleum. That on the 6th day of August 1872, the said Malazewski leased the said premises in complaint described including the said two acres to one O. P. Robbins for three years from the said 6th day of August 1872, and on the 21st day of July 1873 the said Robbins assigned and transferred the said lease to one Peter Jorgenson and the plaintiff herein, and that the only interest that said plaintiff has, or ever has had, in said premises is, and was by virtue of, said lease and assignment. And that on the 24th day of October 1873 and prior to the execution of said contract to convey the said two acres from the said Adam Malazewski to this defendant the said plaintiff and the said Jorgenson, surrendered the lease of the said two acres to the said Malazewski for a valuable consideration.

And for further answer, defendant avers that prior to said purchase by defendant from said Malazewski and the entry of defendant into possession of the said two acres, the said Jorgenson and plaintiff represented to defendant that they had surrendered their lease as to the said two acres demanded in the complaint to said Adam Malazewski for the purpose of enabling defendant to erect thereon oil refining works, and upon the consideration of the great benefit said works would be to said Jorgenson and plaintiff on their hotel and store business in which they were then and there engaged on land adjoining and near said two acres.

That defendants relying upon said representations entered upon said two acres with the knowledge and consent of plaintiff and erected thereon valuable works for refining petroleum at the cost upwards of three thousand dollars.

That by said sale, and said contract, there was sold and guaranteed to defendant for use on said two acres, one inch of water flowing from said spring described in this complaint, to be conveyed by defendant in pipes from said spring to said two acres.

That said plaintiff and said Jorgenson represented to defendant at the time of said sale, and prior thereto, that they consented thereto and had surrendered their lease to that extent, and the plaintiff delivered possession of the right of way to defendants for the purpose of said contract, and pursuant to said contract of sale and said surrender.

Therefore defendant prays to be dismissed to the costs.

F. Genahl & V. E. Howard & Son
Attorneys for Defendant