Curtin v. Salmon River Hydraulic Gold Mining & Ditch Co.
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Siskiyou County and from an order denying a new trial. J. S. Beard, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHarrison, J.
This action was brought for the foreclosure of a mortgage upon certain mining property, executed to the plaintiff’s assignor by the president and secretary of the defendant. The defendant denied its execution of the note and mortgage, and upon this issue the court found in favor of the plaintiff and rendered judgment accordingly. The defendant moved for a new trial upon the ground that the decision was not sustained by the evidence, and, this motion having been denied, has taken this appeal.
The defendant is a mining .corporation organized under the laws of this state, having a capital stock…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Buell v. Buckingham & Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1864
- Butts v. . WoodNew York Court of Appeals · 1867
- Jones v. MorrisonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1883
- Wickersham v. CrittendenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Foster v. Mullanphy Planing Mill Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1887
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- Hotaling v. HotalingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- Holcomb v. ForsythSupreme Court of Alabama · 1927
- Bassett v. FairchildCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- Parsons v. Tacoma Smelting & Refining Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1901
- Hoyt v. HampeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1925
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.