Legal Opinion

Hubbard v. University Bank

California Supreme Court

Decided April 20, 1898No. L. A. No. 485PublishedCited by 6 opinions

MOTION for a supersedeas, on an appeal from a judgment, of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. W. H. Clark, Judge.- The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtBeatty, C. J.

This is a motion by appellants for a supersedeas. The appeal is from a decree directing the sale of mortgaged premises, and for a deficiency judgment. Upon the éx parte application of appellants the trial judge fixed the amount of a stay bond at two thousand four hundred dollars, and á "bond *633in that amount was filed. Subsequently the respondent,: upon notice to appellants, moved the trial court to enlarge the amount of the stay bond, and- an order .was thereupon entered requiring appellants to increase their bond within-five.days to six thousand dollars. This order having been disregarded by…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Chuck v. Quan Wo Chong Co.California Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Boob v. HallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Eisenberg v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  2. McAneny v. Superior Court of Santa Clara Cty.California Supreme Court · 1906
  3. Owen v. Pomona Land & Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1899
  4. Moon v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
  5. McClintock v. PowleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930

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

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

Powered by the Exa API