Legal Opinion
Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Co. v. Zdarsky
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided December 17, 1929No. 5698PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RUDKIN, Circuit Judge.
In this case, as in many others of like character, the appellant is attempting to predicate error on a consent order overruling a demurrer to the complaint. This, of course, is not permissible.
A witness for the appellee testified that !he was a former owner of the tract later sold to the appellee, and that the property was sold at foreclosure sale for about $2,600. On cross-examination he further testified that the sale was made subject to a prior mortgage in the sum of $3,500. This testimony was apparently offered for the purpose of showing, or tending to show, the…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Co. v. TipperCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1929
- Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Co. v. LindquistCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1929
- Deane v. Pocono Med CtrCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1997
- Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Co. v. AndersonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1929
- Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Co. v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1929