Legal Opinion

Thurgood v. Spring

California Supreme Court

Decided July 15, 1903No. S.F. No. 2664PublishedCited by 3 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion in this case and in the case of Mersf elder v. Spring, ante, p. 593.

1Opinion of the Court

SMITH, C.

The action here grows out of the same transaction as that in the case of Mersfelder v. Spring, ante, p. 593, —the suit being by the assignee of Westphal for the sum of thirteen hundred dollars, alleged to be due on the second of the notes referred to in the deed of trust involved in that case.

The defense set up .in the answer is, that in the transaction in which the note was given Westphal agreed to sell and convey to the defendant by good and sufficient deed a good and unencumbered title to the land sold, and that no such deed has been executed or title conveyed to the defendant.…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Bryan v. SwainCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Fraser v. BentelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Herbert Kraft Co. v. BryanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
  3. Scatena v. LawsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API