Legal Opinion

Bowman v. Norton

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1860PublishedCited by 13 opinions

Appeal from the Fourth District. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court. Plaintiff had judgment below. Defendants appeal.

1Opinion of the CourtField, C. J.

Cope, J. concurring.

This is a suit to quiet the title to certain premises situated within the *216city of San Francisco, and grows out of the following facts: In 1853, the defendant, Norton, was the owner of a fifty vara lot in the city, and having erected a dwelling house thereon, occupied it with his family, claiming the property as his homestead. In July of that year, he executed a mortgage upon the premises to the defendant, Barker, to secure the payment of his promissory note of $4,000, with interest. In November following, he executed a second mortgage upon the same premises to the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Stewart v. MackeyTexas Supreme Court · 1856
  2. Howe v. AdamsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1856
  3. Hoyt v. HoweWisconsin Supreme Court · 1854
  4. Chamberlain v. LyellMichigan Supreme Court · 1855
  5. Guiod v. GuiodCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Tyrrell v. BaldwinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Godfrey v. ThorntonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1879
  3. Hansen v. JonesOregon Supreme Court · 1910
  4. Taylor v. HargousCalifornia Supreme Court · 1854
  5. Eby v. FosterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API