Vandyke v. Herman
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Sixth Judicial District. This case was founded on a motion for a mandamus to compel the execution of a sheriff’s deed. The facts, shown by the statement agreed upon, are as follows : On the 15th of May, 1852, Paige, Baker, and Vandusen, made their note to Vandyke for $1500, payabl^ in three months, with interest, at the rate of 3 per cent. per.month, and gave a mortgage to secure it, on a lot in Sacramento City, recorded the same day, at 4J o’clock, P.M.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Sixth Judicial District. This case was founded on a motion for a mandamus to compel the execution of a sheriff’s deed. The facts, shown by the statement agreed upon, are as follows : On the 15th of May, 1852, Paige, Baker, and Vandusen, made their note to Vandyke for $1500, payabl^ in three months, with interest, at the rate of 3 per cent. per.month, and gave a mortgage to secure it, on a lot in Sacramento City, recorded the same day, at 4J o’clock, P.M. On the 4th of November, 1852, Vandyke recovered judgment against said Paige, and on the 6th of December, 1852, against Baker…
1Opinion of the CourtHeydenfeldt, Justice
Wells, Justice, concurred.
The sum paid to the sheriff to redeem the land, was insufficient for that object. The whole amount of Vandyke’s judgment, with interest, should have been paid. The language of the statute is explicit. If the interpretation insisted upon by the respondents, be correct, that by the purchase of the property, the lien of the creditor purchasing, is gone, even for the purpose of a redemption, then the statute would have no meaning whatever.
The legal rules of construction are opposed to such a theory, and require effect to be given to statutes even of doubtful meaning.
The…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Simpson v. CastleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1878
- O'Leary v. SchoenfeldNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1915
- Parke v. HushSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1882