Legal Opinion

Hough v. Ferguson

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 2, 1918No. Civ. No. 2306PublishedCited by 4 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

BEASLY, J., pro tem.

This is an action to foreclose a mortgage. In April, 1912, the plaintiffs were the owners of the 893 acres of land in Fresno County on which they seek to foreclose. They exchanged this land with defendants for land in San Bernardino County, and as a part of the transaction took from the defendants this mortgage. This action was begun over eighteen months after the mortgage was given. The defendants filed a cross-complaint, in which they allege that they were defrauded by the plaintiffs in said exchange of lands. The trial court found against the defendants on all of the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. McCreery v. WellsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Bagdasarian v. GragnonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  2. Ball v. WarnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
  3. Interstate Lumber Co. v. Loop Building Co.California Court of Appeal · 1929
  4. Bagdasarian v. GragnonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API