Dexter v. Pierson
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtPreston, J.
We granted a rehearing in this cause to give further consideration to the contention of respondent that she could, as a subsequent purchaser, invoke the statute of limitations as a defense to a foreclosure action, notwithstanding an express covenant by the mortgagor of the premises inserted in the mortgage that such plea was perpetually waived. She cites a long line of cases, beginning with Lord v. Morris, 18 Cal. 482, and ending with Foster v. Butler, 164 Cal. 623, 627 [130 Pac. 6],
The substance of these holdings is that the mortgagor cannot, by waiving the bar of the statute, affect the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Lord v. MorrisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1861
- Brownrigg v. DefreesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- Wood v. GoodfellowCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
- Fresno Canal & Irrigation Co. v. RowellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Title Insurance & Trust Co. v. Miller & Lux, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1920
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Gonsalves v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
- Hambrecht & Quist Venture Partners v. American Medical International, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1995
- Lerner v. Los Angeles City Board of EducationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
- Miller v. McKennaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- American Medical International, Inc. v. FellerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.