Hopper v. Parkinson
Nevada Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Second Judicial District, Ormsby County. The facts are stated in the opinion. The property sought to be subjected to the payment of this debt is a homestead. (4 Cal. 268; 6 Cal. 234; 10 Cal. 296; 3 Nev. 182.) A mortgage of a homestead, less than five thousand dollars in value, signed by the husband alone, is absolutely void.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the Second Judicial District, Ormsby County. The facts are stated in the opinion. The property sought to be subjected to the payment of this debt is a homestead. (4 Cal. 268; 6 Cal. 234; 10 Cal. 296; 3 Nev. 182.) A mortgage of a homestead, less than five thousand dollars in value, signed by the husband alone, is absolutely void. (Stats. 1864-5, 226; 8 Cal. 66; 12 Cal. 327; 33 Cal. 266; 1 Nev. 568 and 607.) A vendor’s lien does not exist where a mortgage security is taken for the purchase money. (12 Cal. 301; 17 Cal. 70; 23 Cal. 633.) The obligation in suit…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
JOHNSON, J.:
On the twenty-fourth of April, 1865, Hopper, the respondent *235herein, sold to Richard R. Parldnson, one of the appellants herein, a lot of land in Carson City and improvements thereon, including a dwelling house. A deed of conveyance in the ordinary form was executed, but no part of the purchase money being paid, said Parkinson made his promissory note for the amount expressed in the deed as the consideration of such sale, and also executed a mortgage to Hopper on the property so conveyed, to secure the payment of said note. The deed, note, and mortgage are of…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Peterson v. HornblowerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
- McHendry v. ReillyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1859
3Cited by3 opinions
- Roby v. Bismarck National BankNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1894
- Howell v. BushMississippi Supreme Court · 1877
- Johnson County Savings Bank v. CarrollSupreme Court of Iowa · 1899