Chapman v. Hicks
California Court of Appeal
1 APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Fred H. Taft, Judge. Reversed. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtFinlayson, P. J.
This is an action to quiet title. From a judgment in favor of defendants, plaintiff appeals.
On March 7, 1905, defendant Hicks and wife executed to plaintiff an instrument, in form a grant deed, but which the court found to be in effect a mortgage given to plaintiff to secure an indebtedness of $265 borrowed by Hicks and wife from plaintiff and evidenced by a promissory note for that sum executed by the borrowers, as payers, to plaintiff, as payee, bearing date March 8,, 1905, and due three months after date. Plaintiff, on March 8, 1905, executed an instrument whereby he agreed to reconvey the…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Sheehan v. SullivanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Couts v. WinstonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
- Lee v. MurphyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Booth v. HoskinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Faxon v. All PersonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Beeler v. American Trust Co.California Supreme Court · 1944
- J. Bryant Kasey and Maryann Kasey v. Molybdenum Corporation of America, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1964
- Clinton v. Utah Construction Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1925
- Nolan v. BenninghoffMontana Supreme Court · 1922
- Gerken v. Davidson Grocery Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1931
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.