Purchase of this book includes free trial access to www.million-books.com where you can read more than a million books for free. This is an OCR edition with typos. Excerpt from book: Opinion of the Court?Coleman, J. 1. Plaintiff's complaint cannot be construed as one to quiet title, either under our statute or independent of statute. Section 5514, Revised Laws of Nevada, relative to actions to quiet title, reads: "An action may be brought by any person against another who claims an estate or interest in real property, adverse to him, for the purpose of determining such adverse claim." Mr. Pomeroy, in his work on Code Remedies (3d ed.), at section 363, says: "The nature of the action to quiet title is such that it is impossible to lay down any but the most general rule in relation to its parties defendant. The very object of the proceeding assumes that there are other claimants adverse to the plaintiff, setting up titles and interests in the land or other subject-matter hostile to his. Of course, all these adverse claimants are proper parties defendant, and if the decree is to accomplish its full effect of putting all litigation to rest, they are necessary defendants. Originally, and independent of statute, this particular jurisdiction of equity was only invoked when either many persons asserted titles adverse to that of the plaintiff, or when one person repeatedly asserted his single title by a succession of legal actions, all of which had failed, and in either case the object of the suit was to settle the whole controversy in one proceeding. The action has, however, been greatly extended by statute, especially in the Western States, and is there an ordinary means of trying a disputed title between two opposite claimants." The court, in Low v. Staples, 2 Nev. on page 213, in speaking of the effect of the statutory action to quiet title, as the statute existed at that time, said: " The old equity jurisprudence of the court is extended, but ...