Beach v. Hodgdon
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of' the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order refusing a new trial. The action was in the nature of a creditor’s bill, brought by a judgment creditor of the defendant Ilodgdon, to set aside certain deeds executed by him to the defendant Hildreth, and to subject the premises conveyed to the payment of the plaintiff’s judgment. The further facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtRoss, J.
1. This is not an action to enforce a lien upon real property, but a bill in aid of execution, to set aside two certain conveyances made by the execution debtor, upon the ground that they were fraudulently executed. Therefore, the provision of the present constitution requiring actions for the enforcement of liens upon real estate to be commenced in the county in \yhich such real property is situated, does not apply.
2. There is no specification calling in question the order striking out the answer of Hildreth. Nor did Hildreth move for a new trial. Therefore, no objection which might have…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Stearns v. Los Angeles City School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
- Heffernan v. Bennett & ArmourCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
- Alpha Hardware & Supply Co. v. Ruby Mines Co.California Court of Appeal · 1929
- Woodbury v. Nevada Southern Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1898
- Wofford-Fain & Co. v. HamptonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1917
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.