Drake v. Duvenick
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Fifteenth Judicial ■District, City and County of Ban Francisco. The judgment foreclosing the mortgage in the case of Debus v. Dorland et al., did not recite that service was made of the summons, or that the defendant Dorland had made default, or that any proofs were taken in open Court. The other facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Belcher, J.:
This is an action of ejectment to recover the possession of land in the City of San Francisco. Both parties claim title to the demanded premises under one Thomas Dorland; the defendants, under a Sheriff’s deed made in 1857, in pursuance of a decree of foreclosure and sale thereunder, and the plaintiff under a conveyance from Dorland, made in 1867.
At the trial the defendants offered the judgment roll in the foreclosure case, and the plaintiff objected to its being received in evidence on the ground that no judgment or de*462cree in the case was ever rendered by the Court,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Hahn v. KellyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
- Coit v. HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1861
- McCauley v. FultonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
- Bowers v. DickersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1861
- Simson v. EcksteinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- Crim v. KessingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Treadway v. EastburnTexas Supreme Court · 1881
- Sieber v. FrinkSupreme Court of Colorado · 1883
- Ex parte KearnyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
- Wiggin v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.