Thompson v. Gorner
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Alameda County. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcFarland, J.
This is an action to foreclose a mortgage given to secure a promissory note. The appeal involves only a small amount of interest on the principal of the note. The note was dated March 20, 1888, and matured two years after date. The interest clause which gives rise to the present controversy is as follows: “With interest thereon, in like gold coin, from the date hereof until paid, at the rate of eight per cent per annum, payr able monthly, in advance, and if said principal or interest is not paid as it becomes due it shall thereafter bear .interest at the rate of one per cent per month.” The…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Johnson v. PolhemusCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Simmons v. HamiltonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
- Erenberg v. PetersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
- Taylor v. SoldatiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
3Cited by24 opinions
- Garrett v. Coast & Southern Federal Savings & Loan Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
- Stevinson v. JoyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Stockton Combined Harvester & Agricultural Works v. Glens Falls Insurance Co.California Supreme Court · 1898
- Henehan v. HartCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Continental Oil Co. v. BellMontana Supreme Court · 1933
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.