Hudepohl v. Liberty Hill Water & Mining Co.
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Nevada County. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtPaterson, J.
This is an action to set aside an exetion sale, on the ground that the property, consisting of several disconnected parcels of land, was sold en masse.
The court below sustained a demurrer to the complaint, and we think its action was right.
The plaintiff’s right to maintain the action rests upon his claim to be a redemptioner by virtue of a judgment rendered in his favor against the defendant corporation in the superior court of San Francisco, of which a transcript of the docket was filed in the county recorder’s office in Nevada County, on March 28, 1887. The property had, however, been sold…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Smith v. RandallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1856
- Jones v. Kokomo Building Ass'nIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
- Mixer v. SibleyIllinois Supreme Court · 1869
- Riddell v. HarrellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- City of San Francisco v. PixleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1862
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Pettis v. JohnstonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1920
- Sargent v. ShumakerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- Power v. LarabeeNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1894
- Bechtel v. WierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- Thomas v. ThomasMontana Supreme Court · 1911
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.