Hoppe v. Hoppe
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sacramento County. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. The proper construction of the order setting apart the homestead is, that it was set apart for the use of the family, as the law directs the court to so set it apart. (Sheehy v. Miles, 93 Cal. 295.) It is the law, and not the phraseology of the order of the court, which directs the course of title, and vests it in the parties entitled to it.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sacramento County. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. The proper construction of the order setting apart the homestead is, that it was set apart for the use of the family, as the law directs the court to so set it apart. (Sheehy v. Miles, 93 Cal. 295.) It is the law, and not the phraseology of the order of the court, which directs the course of title, and vests it in the parties entitled to it. (Rich v. Tubbs, 41 Cal. 34; Watson v. His Creditors, 58 Cal. 556; Tyrrell v. Baldwin, 78 Cal. 470-76; Herrold v. Reen, 58 Cal. 443; Estate…
1Opinion of the CourtHarrison, J.
The first of these actions, Herman W. Hoppe et al. v. Julia Hoppe and W. A. Fountain, was to *98obtain a partition between the plaintiffs and Julia Hoppe of the lands described in the complaint, Fountain being a party defendant because he claimed to be a .mortgagee of the whole of the premises under a mortgage executed by the defendant, Julia Hoppe.
The second of the actions was afterwards brought by Fountain against Julia Hoppe to foreclose said mortgage, and the plaintiffs in the first action intervened in the' second, and, by order of the court, the two actions were consolidated.
Fountain…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Phelan v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Ord v. BartlettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Cody v. BeanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Trotter v. TrotterSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1876
- Keyes v. HillSupreme Court of Vermont · 1858
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Beronio v. Ventura County Lumber Co.California Supreme Court · 1900
- Saddlemire v. Stockton Savings & Loan SocietyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Sanguinetti v. RossenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1906
- Aviel v. NgCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- Hembree v. Magnolia Petroleum Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.