Locke v. Klunker
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Joaquin County and from an order denying a new trial, and from orders refusing to vacate an order appointing a receiver and settling an account of the receiver. Joseph H. Budd, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
When this case was in Department the opinion hereto annexed was prepared by Mr. Commissioner Chipman. After due consideration of the case, we are satisfied with that opinion and with the conclusions therein reached, and that the judgment of the court below should be modified in accordance with the directions of said opinion. Therefore, for the reasons given in that opinion, the decree of foreclosure and the order settling the receiver’s account are affirmed, and *233the court is directed to cause the net proceeds of the crops in the hands of the receiver to he paid to the defendant…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Miller v. LucoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Simpson v. FergusonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Bank of Shasta v. BoydCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Bank of Woodland v. HeronCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- Staples v. MayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Cowdery v. London Etc. BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- F.People v. MonierCalifornia Supreme Court · 2017
- Farm Mortgage Loan Co. v. PettetNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1924
- Exterstein v. HigginsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
- Consolidated Irrigation District v. CrawshawCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.