Fresno Investment Co. v. Russell
California Court of Appeal
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtSturtevant, J.
This is an action brought to foreclose a mortgage; the plaintiff had judgment and the defendant appealed. The plaintiff’s complaint is in the ordinary form to foreclose a mortgage. The note and mortgage therein set forth are the note for $198.93 and the mortgage securing the same which are referred to in the opinion this day filed, Russell v. Penniston et al., ante, p. 492 [203 Pac. 813]. In his answer the defendant Russell set forth certain denials. Then, as his first affirmative defense, he alleged, in slightly different language and in a consolidated form, the allegations set forth in the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Felch v. BeaudryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
- Smith v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- Martin v. SplivaloCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Vance v. OlingerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
- Montgomery v. HarringtonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- California Trust Co. v. GustasonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
- Brainard v. WhitmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
- California Trust Co. v. GustasonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940