Legal Opinion

Crummer v. Whitehead

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 19, 1964No. Civ. 21426PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSalsman, J.

Appellant Marguerite E. Whitehead appeals from a judgment in favor of respondent R. E. Crummer in an unlawful detainer action brought after foreclosure sale under a deed of trust.

Appellant’s principal argument for reversal is that the evidence establishes as a matter of law that the property involved was not duly sold under the power of sale contained in the deed of trust and that title under the sale was not duly perfected. The record does not support appellant’s contention and the judgment must therefore be affirmed.

Appellant first argues that the property was sold for an inadequate price.…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Blank v. CoffinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Shimpones v. StickneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
  3. Seidell v. Anglo-California Trust Co.California Court of Appeal · 1942
  4. Bliss v. Security-First National BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
  5. Central National Bank v. BellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Karlsen v. American Savings & Loan Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971
  2. Knapp v. DohertyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
  3. State v. BarnesCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1974
  4. Arnolds Management Corp. v. EischenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
  5. Munger v. MooreCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970

14 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