Corey v. Matot
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. H. T. Dewhirst, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtSloane, J.
In this case the defendants, John E. Matot and Mary E. Matot, husband and wife, had executed to the plaintiff their promissory note secured by mortgage upon certain real property. Thereafter, and before the maturity of the note, the defendant Mary E. Matot declared and filed a homestead on the property in conformity with section 1263 of the Civil Code, for the benefit of herself and family. After the maturity of the note, but before the running of the statute of limitations, the defendant John E. Matot, without the knowledge of consent of his wife, entered into a stipulation and agreement in…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Lord v. MorrisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1861
- Simon v. Justice's CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Hart v. ChurchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Barber v. BabelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
- Jackson v. LongwellSupreme Court of Kansas · 1901
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- White v. RosenthalCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
- Siuru v. SellMontana Supreme Court · 1939
- Baker v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932