Legal Opinion

Hamilton v. Carpenter

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 2, 1942No. Civ. 13474PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMcCOMB, J.

From an order denying defendants' motion to set aside a sale of real property pursuant to a decree foreclosing a deed of trust, defendants appeal.

The essential facts are:

Defendants executed a deed of trust to secure a promissory note payable to plaintiff. This deed of trust was foreclosed as a mortgage pursuant to the requirements of section 725a of the Code of Civil Procedure. (See Hamilton v. Carpenter, 15 Cal. (2d) 130 [98 P. (2d) 1027].) Thereafter on December 3, 1940, the property described in the deed of trust consisting of two separate parcels of real estate was sold en masse to…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Frink v. RoeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
  2. Smith v. RandallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1856
  3. Hamilton v. CarpenterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
  4. Connick v. HillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  5. Browne v. FerreaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1876

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Carpenter v. Title Insurance & Trust Co.California Court of Appeal · 1945
  2. Turner v. DonovanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
  3. Young v. BarkerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
  4. Young v. HesslerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
  5. Carpenter v. HamiltonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944

3 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