Legal Opinion

Granger v. Sherriff

California Supreme Court

Decided July 24, 1901No. L.A. No. 797PublishedCited by 12 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

GRAY, C.

This is an action to foreclose a mortgage given to secure the payment of a note for the principal sum of $48,-500, besides interest and attorney’s fees. The plaintiff had judgment, and defendants appeal therefrom, and urge three grounds of reversal, which we will notice in their order.

1. The sufficiency of the summons is challenged, and a motion was made to quash the same, on the ground that it did not conform to the requirements of section 407 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in that it did not contain a notice.that unless the defendants appear and answer, “the plaintiff will take…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Emeric v. AlvaradoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
  2. Crawford v. NealCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
  3. Stanquist v. HebbardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. In Re OlsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
  2. Sarracino v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
  3. Graydon v. Pasadena Redevelopment AgencyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980
  4. Smith v. Mt. Diablo Unified School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
  5. City & County of San Francisco v. CarraroCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API