Simpson v. Ferguson
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Riverside County. J. S. Noyes, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court in Department One.
1Opinion of the CourtVan Fleet, J.
Upon consideration of this cause in Bank, after a more full and thorough presentation *184thereof than was had in Department, we are satisfied that the conclusion reached by the department was correct and should be adhered to.
It is urged that sections 2955 and following of the Civil Code, providing for the manner of mortgaging growing crops, do not establish an exclusive method; that, as this class of property may, under some conditions, be regarded as realty, and under other conditions as personalty, it must follow that under corresponding conditions the property may be the subject of a real…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Teal v. WalkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Gilman v. Illinois and Mississippi Telegraph Company. Coykendall, Garnishee v. IdemSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Sexton v. . BreeseNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- West v. ConantCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Montgomery v. MerrillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- Cowdery v. London Etc. BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- Thiara v. Spycher Bros. (In Re Thiara)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- Kinnison v. Guaranty Liquidating Corp.California Supreme Court · 1941
- Mortgage Guarantee Co. v. SampsellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
- Watson v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1950
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.