Harvey v. Foster
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the county of Tehama, and from an order refusing a new trial. In an action by the plaintiff against one Logan, an attachment was issued and levied by Foster, sheriff, upon the land of Logan, who appeared in the action, but did not except to the regularity of any of the attachment proceedings. The plaintiff recovered judgment.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the county of Tehama, and from an order refusing a new trial. In an action by the plaintiff against one Logan, an attachment was issued and levied by Foster, sheriff, upon the land of Logan, who appeared in the action, but did not except to the regularity of any of the attachment proceedings. The plaintiff recovered judgment. Kraft held a mortgage upon the land prior to the attachment, and also an unsecured note against Logan for four thousand dollars. Afterwards Kraft foreclosed his mortgage, and at a sale made by Foster, as sheriff, bid for…
1Opinion of the CourtMcKinstry, J.
As the answer consists only of general and specific denials of the averments of the complaint, the finding “that all the allegations of the plaintiff’s complaint are true” covers all the issues of fact.
The attachment affidavit filed by plaintiff in the action Harvey v. Logan stated that the indebtedness from the defendant to the plaintiff therein had not been secured by any mortgage or lien, “ or, if originally so secured,” such security had become valueless. The affidavit fails to state the amount of the indebtedness due from Logan to Harvey. (Code Civ. Proc. § 530.)
If the defendant in the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Porter v. PicoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
- Ferguson v. TuttSupreme Court of Kansas · 1871
- Fridenberg v. PiersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1861
- Wilke v. CohnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
- Hawley v. DelmasCalifornia Supreme Court · 1854
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Title Insurance & Trust Co. v. California Development Co.California Supreme Court · 1915
- Atkinson v. FooteCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
- Bailey v. Aetna Indemnity Co., of HartfordCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1907
- Scrivener v. DietzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
- Patch v. StewartMontana Supreme Court · 1927
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.