Murray v. Etchepare
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcFARLAND, J.
Action to foreclose a mortgage executed February 12, 1895, by defendant Etchepare to plaintiff. Leonis was made a party defendant upon the averment that she claimed some interest in the mortgaged premises “subsequent to and subject to the lien of the plaintiff’s mortgage.” Etchepare suffered default. Leonis answered, averring that she was the owner of the premises on and prior to July 31, 1894, and on that day conveyed the same to defendant Etchepare; that the conveyance to the latter was procured by fraud, false representations, etc., and that these facts were known to plaintiff when she…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Sichler v. LookCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- City of San Francisco v. LawtonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1861
- Ord v. BartlettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Randall v. DuffCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Marlow v. BarlewCalifornia Supreme Court · 1879
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Mercantile Trust Co. v. Sunset Road Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1917
- Peachy v. WitterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- De Leonis v. HammelCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1905
- Hentig v. JohnsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1908
- Tinsley v. Atlantic Mines Co.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1904
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.