Legal Opinion

Everts v. Blaschko

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 20, 1936No. Civ. 1957PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMarks, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment entered after granting a motion to dismiss the action.

This action was brought to recover judgment against defendant for the deficiency- remaining after exhausting the security, consisting of a deed of trust on real property, given to secure the payment of a promissory note from defendant to plaintiff. The complaint was filed September 14, 1935. Defendant appeared by demurrer on October 5, 1935, and also filed her motion to dismiss on the same day. As far as the record shows, the trial judge did not rule on the demurrer.

The notice of motion to dismiss…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. City of Oakland v. Oakland Water Front Co.California Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Haldeman v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
  3. Brown v. FerdonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
  4. Johnston v. BakerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
  5. Westbay v. GrayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Goddard v. Security Title Insurance & Guarantee Co.California Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Gonsalves v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
  3. Birkhofer v. KrummCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
  4. Bakersfield Home Building Co. v. J. K. McAlpine Land & Development Co.California Court of Appeal · 1938
  5. Berendsen v. McIverCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954

4 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