Legal Opinion

Camp v. Land

California Supreme Court

Decided September 26, 1898No. Sac. No. 416PublishedCited by 15 opinions

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sacramento County, and from an order denying a new trial. J. W. Hughes, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.-

1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.

These appeals are from the judgment and from the order denying a new trial. To secure payment of his promissory note plaintiff Camp had executed a mortgage upon certain realty to defendant Land. Afterward, being indebted to the National Bank of D. O. Mills & Co., he executed to trustees in its behalf a deed of trust to the same land affected by the mortgage. This deed was in the form commonly used in this state and frequently considered by this court.

Land brought suit to foreclose his mortgage, impleading the Camps, husband and wife, the bank, its trustees under the deed of trust, and others.…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. National Bank v. MatthewsSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
  2. National Bank v. WhitneySupreme Court of the United States · 1881
  3. Savings & Loan Society v. BurnettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
  4. Sacramento Bank v. AlcornCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  5. Ex parte HedleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Meholin v. CarlsonIdaho Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Staacke v. BellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  3. J. I. Case Threshing MacHine Co. v. Copren Bros.California Court of Appeal · 1919
  4. Withington v. ShayCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
  5. Fergus County v. OsweilerMontana Supreme Court · 1938

10 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