Legal Opinion
Hickman v. Mulder
California Court of Appeal
Decided June 4, 1976No. Civ. 15269PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
McDANIEL, J.
Introduction
The action in the trial court was by the beneficiaries of a purchase-money deed of trust against the trustors to recover damages for alleged “willful” waste of the grapefruit orchards and vineyards covered by the deed of trust. Suit was filed after the plaintiffs had bought in the security noted at a nonjudicial foreclosure sale for less than the full amount of the default. The defendants’ demurrer, based primarily on Code of Civil Procedure section 580b, one of the two 1 so-called antideficiency statutes, was sustained without leave to amend. From the judgment…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Cornelison v. KornbluthCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
- Brown v. JensenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
- Lytle v. Payette-Oregon Slope Irrigation DistrictOregon Supreme Court · 1944
- American Savings & Loan Ass'n v. LeedsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- Los Angeles Trust & Savings Bank v. BortensteinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Grange Debris Box & Wrecking Co. v. SUPERIOR COURT OF MARIN CTY.California Court of Appeal · 1993
- Shepherd v. RobinsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1981
- In Re Robert L. Mills, Debtor. Robert L. Mills v. Sdrawde Titleholders, Inc., a California CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
- Schellinger Brothers v. CotterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
- Osuna v. AlbertsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.