Legal Opinion

Lineker v. McColgan

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 31, 1921No. Civ. No. 2340PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFinch, P. J.

The plaintiff appeals from the judgment herein denying his prayer for an injunction and an accounting.

While the pleadings are complicated and lengthy, covering forty-eight pages of the printed transcript, the facts essential to a correct understanding of the issues raised on appeal may be briefly stated.

"The plaintiff was the owner of the land described in the complaint, subject to certain encumbrances in the following order of priority:

1. Trust deed to defendant R. McColgan, as security for payment to defendant Daniel A. McColgan of a promissory note for $2,850 and future advances, executed…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Trimm v. . MarshNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
  2. Ten Eyck v. . CraigNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
  3. Carpentier v. BrenhamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870
  4. Copsey v. Sacramento BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
  5. De Martin v. PhelanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Heney v. HeneyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
  2. Lineker v. MarshallCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1925

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API