Legal Opinion

Palmtag v. Roadhouse

California Supreme Court

Decided August 31, 1893No. 15,018PublishedCited by 2 opinions

APPEAL from Superior Court, Monterey County. Action by Frederika Palmtag against George W. Roadhouse and Emma Roadhouse, his wife, to foreclose a mortgage. From a judgment for defendants, plaintiff appeals.

1Opinion of the Court

SEARLS, C.

This is an action brought to foreclose a mortgage given by the defendants, George W. Roadhouse and wife, to secure a promissory note for $1,550 and interest, made by said defendants, Roadhouse and wife. The note and mortgage were dated March 25, 1885, and the note was payable to Frederika Palmtag, or order, one year after date. The action was commenced July 9, 1890—as may be seen, more than four years after the maturity of the note. Defendants demurred to the complaint upon the ground, among others, that the cause of action was barred by the provisions of section 337 of the Code of…

Also in this document: Per curiam.

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Harmon v. PageCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
  2. Farris v. MerrittCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
  3. Barringer v. WardenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1859

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Gatlin v. VautCourt Of Appeals Of Indian Territory · 1906
  2. In re R. L. Radke Co.District Court, N.D. California · 1911

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API