Stewart v. Nevins
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, Fourth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco. The complaint alleged that B. F. Moulton, in 1864, made his promissory notes to J. H. Kevins for $1750. That on the 14th of August, 1868, Moulton entered into a written agreement with Holmes, in which it was recited that Holmes had bought of Moulton, Mission block No. 73, and the north half of Mission block No. 74 (less thirteen lots previously sold), for $90,000, of which $43,526.50…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court, Fourth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco. The complaint alleged that B. F. Moulton, in 1864, made his promissory notes to J. H. Kevins for $1750. That on the 14th of August, 1868, Moulton entered into a written agreement with Holmes, in which it was recited that Holmes had bought of Moulton, Mission block No. 73, and the north half of Mission block No. 74 (less thirteen lots previously sold), for $90,000, of which $43,526.50 had been paid; and that the title of W. H. Seaton to the north half of block 74 was outstanding and to be purchased, and…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Wallace, C. J.:
At the time of his death the testator had neither a legal nor an equitable estate in the premises in controversy. Indeed, it does not appear that he ever owned these lots, or either of them, nor any part of Mission block 74, in which these lots are located. The complaint alleges that one Seaton held the legal title to the lots as security for a debt due to him from the testator. If the title of Seaton, held as a mere security, is to be denominated in this proceeding as the legal title, it is not alleged in the complaint that he derived it from the testator, and it…
2Cited by3 opinions
- County of Yolo v. BarneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Green v. BrooksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Neusted v. SkernswellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945