Keiser v. Levering
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, and from an order denying a new trial. John M. York, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtConrey, P. J.
This is an action to recover possession of personal property. Prom a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, and from an order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial, the defendant appeals.
By the first count of the complaint it appears that the defendant made to the plaintiff a chattel mortgage securing a note on which there was due at the time of filing the complaint the sum of $835. The mortgage contained the usual provision entitling plaintiff to possession of the property, with right of sale to satisfy his claim whenever default should be made on the defendant's obligation. The facts of…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hayt v. BentelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
- Hibernia Savings & Loan Society v. ThorntonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Berson v. NunanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
- Claudius v. AguirreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Stewart v. TaylorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Shank v. BlackburnCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- Campbell v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
- Orchardson v. ChristieCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1916