Monroe v. Fohl
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Joaquin County. The note, to secure which the mortgage in question was given, contained a provision that in case default was made in the payment of the interest, the note should immediately become due at the option of the holder thereof. The further facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Hayne, C.
— Action to foreclose a mortgage, the plaintiff claiming that he was entitled to elect, and did elect, to have the principal become due for non-payment of interest. The plaintiff had judgment on demurrer to the answer, and the defendant appeals. We think the answer presented no defense.
1. The note was dated June 25, 1885, and the interest was payable annually. On October 10, 1885, the defendant paid eight hundred dollars on account of the note, without anything being said on either side as to whether the payment was to be applied to the interest or to the principal. Conceding, in…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Mascarel v. RaffourCalifornia Supreme Court · 1876
- Carriere v. MinturnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1855
- Hook v. WhiteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
- Smith v. McDonaldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
3Cited by23 opinions
- Smith v. Faris-Kesl Construction Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1915
- Berry and Berry v. BartonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1902
- Julien v. Model Building, Loan & Investment Ass'nWisconsin Supreme Court · 1902
- Prescott v. GradyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Hamilton v. BlakeneySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1917
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.