Legal Opinion

Dexter v. Pierson

California Supreme Court

Decided November 2, 1931No. Docket No. L.A. 11934PublishedCited by 22 opinions

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

  1. Lord v. MorrisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1861
  2. Brownrigg v. DefreesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
  3. Wood v. GoodfellowCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
  4. Fresno Canal & Irrigation Co. v. RowellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  5. 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

  1. Gonsalves v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
  2. Hambrecht & Quist Venture Partners v. American Medical International, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1995
  3. Lerner v. Los Angeles City Board of EducationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
  4. Miller v. McKennaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  5. American Medical International, Inc. v. FellerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976

17 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