Houghton v. Tibbets
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Riverside County. J. S. Hoyes, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
CHIPMAN, C.
—Action to foreclose a mortgage. Defend ants Lewis Jacobs and Lewis Meyerstein, partners as Bank of San Bernardino, appeared and filed a cross-complaint against all the other defendants in the action, whereby they sought to foreclose a mortgage against defendants Tibbets and wife. Appellant William T. Curtis was named as a party defendant in the cross-complaint. The only service of the complaint upon Curtis, as shown by the record, was proved by affidavit, in8 which it is stated that affiant “personally served the same on W. F.. Curtis, one of the defendants named in said action.”…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Sichler v. LookCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- de McKinlay v. TuttleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
- White v. PattonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- County of Yolo v. KnightCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Hibernia Savings & Loan Society v. ClarkeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Estate of CaldwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
- State Ex Rel. Regis v. District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 1936
- Brum v. IvinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
- Fox v. StubenrauchCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1905
- Tasker v. NietoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.