Cardenas v. Miller
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Santa Barbara County and from an order denying a new trial. W. B. Cope, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
The Court.
Upon further consideration of this cause upon rehearing we are satisfied with the conclusion reached in Department, as expressed in the opinion of Mr. Commissioner Searls. The supposed conflict between the opinion of the Department and the case of Fette v. Lane (Cal., Sept. 21, 1894), 37 Pac. Rep. 914, urged in the petition for rehearing, does not exist. The court were there considering the rights of a subsequent mortgagee taking with notice of a prior unrecorded mortgage, and the question as to the rights of an attaching creditor against the holder of such a mortgage was not…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Karst v. . GaneNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
- Brothers v. Mundell, Munzesheimer & Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1883
- Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. v. HendricksonNew York Supreme Court · 1857
- Allen v. McCallaSupreme Court of Iowa · 1868
- Berson v. NunanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by38 opinions
- Childers v. ChildersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
- Noyes v. Bank of ItalyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
- Wood v. RoachCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
- Coleman v. Brotherhood State BankCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1979
- Hopper v. KeysCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.