Legal Opinion

On Rehearing

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided April 22, 1926Published

1Opinion of the Court

A further study of this case has convinced me that the judgment of nonsuit must be affirmed, but for reasons somewhat different from those advanced in the principal opinion. The cases of Cederholm v. Loofborrow, 2 Idaho 191, 9 P. 641, andOuld v. Stoddard, 54 Cal. 613, are not controlling. Claim and delivery is not the "one action" to foreclose a mortgage (C. S., sec. 6949), and it may be maintained against a stranger for the possession of the mortgaged chattels, where the mortgage entitles the mortgagee to possession therefor. (First Nat. Bankof St. Anthony v. Steers, 9 Idaho 519, 108 Am. St.…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Martin v. BeckerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
  2. Ould v. StoddardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
  3. Murphy v. Hellman Commercial Trust & Savings BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
  4. First National Bank v. SteersIdaho Supreme Court · 1904
  5. Cederholm v. LoofborrowIdaho Supreme Court · 1886

1 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