Hancock v. Watson
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Eleventh District. Action to foreclose a mortgage on a quartz mill and lode against the mortgagors and Duck & Sanders, who are subsequent purchasers of the property under execution sale. The complaint describes the mill and lode more minutely than it is described in the mortgage, locating them at Bath, formerly called Sarahsville, Placer county, and avers that this is the same property described in the mortgage.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Eleventh District. Action to foreclose a mortgage on a quartz mill and lode against the mortgagors and Duck & Sanders, who are subsequent purchasers of the property under execution sale. The complaint describes the mill and lode more minutely than it is described in the mortgage, locating them at Bath, formerly called Sarahsville, Placer county, and avers that this is the same property described in the mortgage. The decree for plaintiff follows the description in the complaint—the Court below having permitted plaintiff, against defendant’s exception, td* introduce parol…
1Opinion of the CourtCope, J.
Baldwin, J. concurring.
This is an action to foreclose a mortgage upon the undivided half of a quartz mill and lode situated in Placer county. The property is described in the mortgage as the “ interest in the quartz mill and lode formerly owned by John H. Hancock, said interest being one-half of the mill and lode.” The only question presented relates to the sufficiency of this description. The appellants contend that it is so defective and uncertain as to render the mortgage inoperative and void. The respondent claims that although defective, it is sufficient to entitle him to resort…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Sprague v. EdwardsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
- Hubbird v. GoinCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1905
- California Title Insurance & Trust Co. v. PaulyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896