Watson v. Collins
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtTobriner, J.
In this action to foreclose a deed of trust we must deal with respondents’ procedural right to intervene in the action and respondents’ substantive right to defend it upon the ground that their payments conformed to the terms of the obligation secured by the deed. We have concluded that appellant cannot successfully attack the intervention at the appellate level when she failed to object to the motion to intervene in the trial court. As to the substantive issue, we believe that respondents may raise the defense that their promissory note did not conform to the deed and failed to express the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Goodenow v. EwerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- Herrlich v. McDonaldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- El Rio Oils Ltd. v. Pacific Coast Asphalt Co.California Court of Appeal · 1949
- Hart v. WaltonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1908
- Parker v. HardistyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- American Home Insurance v. Travelers Indemnity Co.California Court of Appeal · 1981
- Shupe v. NelsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
- Kollath v. Chicago Title and Trust Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1974
- Orcutt v. FerraniniCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
- Panterra GP, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2022