Montgomery v. Tutt
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Fifteenth Judicial District, County of Colusi. The facts appear in the opinion of the Court.
1Opinion of the Court 1
I. The Court below erred in ordering the issuance of a writ of assistance against the appellant alone. The action and the decree were against him and several others jointly. The writ should conform to the decree.
II. The decree does not authorize the issuance of the writ. It does not require the delivery of the possession to the purchaser under the mortgage sale, and there was no technical foreclosure. Daniell’s Chan. Prac. 1280; Smith’s Chan. Prac. 447.
Belcher, Beatty & Clark for Respondent.
1. A Court of Chancery has power to carry its own decrees into execution.
2. When the mortgagor in…
Also in this document: Opinion of the Court · Field.
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Kershaw v. ThompsonNew York Court of Chancery · 1820
- Wolf v. FleischackerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1855
3Cited by20 opinions
- Sichler v. LookCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Hamilton v. NakaiCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1971
- Hamilton v. NakaiCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1972
- Taylor v. HulettIdaho Supreme Court · 1908
- Ball v. Ridge Copper Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1898
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.