Merced Security Savings Bank v. Casaccia
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Merced County. The facts are stated in the opinion,
1Opinion of the Court
Temple, C.
This appeal is upon the judgment-roll. The action was brought to foreclose a mortgage. The answer is a plea in bar.
The court found, among other things, that on the twenty-ninth day of July, 1889, one Flanagan was indebted to plaintiff in the sum of $1,032.07, and to defendant Casaccia in the sum of $600. Casaccia then assumed the debt of Flanagan to plaintiff, and gave his note for the same, which was accepted by the bank. Casaccia at the same time took from Flanagan his note secured by mortgage for $1,632.07 which was then assigned to plaintiff as collateral security for Casaccia’s…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Blumberg v. BirchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Vandewater v. McRaeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
3Cited by43 opinions
- Brown v. JensenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
- Kissinger v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
- San Joaquin & Kings River Canal & Irrigation Co. v. StevinsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Savings Bank of San Diego v. Central Market Co.California Supreme Court · 1898
- Mortgage Guarantee Co. v. SampsellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.