Lee v. Murphy
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sutter County and from an order denying a new trial. E. A. Davis, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
CHIPMAN, C.
On March 11, 1892, the defendant, M. E. Murphy, executed a promissory note for fourteen hundred dollars to W. H. Lee, plaintiff’s testator (and husband), and on the-same day he executed a mortgage on the premises described in the complaint to said Lee, to secure the payment of said note. The mortgage was acknowledged by Murphy before Lee, the mortgagee, and the name of the mortgagee given in the mortgage and the name of the notary were identical.
The consideration of this note was money paid by said Lee to one A. K. Boutwell, at the request of said Murphy, as the purchase price of…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Groesbeck v. SeeleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1865
- Martin v. ZellerbachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
- Davis v. BeazleySupreme Court of Virginia · 1881
- Stevens v. HamptonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1870
- Crocker v. CarpenterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by60 opinions
- Smith v. BanghamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- Gulf Production Co. v. Continental Oil Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1939
- Campbell v. GenshleaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
- Chase v. National Indemnity Co.California Court of Appeal · 1954
- Carman v. AthearnCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.