Stevens v. Holman
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Walter. Van Dyke, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcFarland, J.
This is an action for the reformation of a mortgage executed to plaintiff by the defendants, Holman and wife, and to foreclose the same. Judgment went for plaintiff, and defendants appeal from the judgment—bringing up the judgment-roll alone.
Respondent had a former note and mortgage from appellants; and appellants, desiring further time, agreed to give a new note and a mortgage to secure it covering certain described land. Respondent consented; whereupon the old note and mortgage were canceled, and the note and mortgage now in suit were given. But the description in the new mortgage did not…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Hamar v. MedskerIndiana Supreme Court · 1878
- Leonis v. LazzarovichCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
- Sav. & Loan Soc'y v. MeeksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
- Banbury v. ArnoldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Hayford v. KocherCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
3Cited by13 opinions
- Lemoge Electric v. County of San MateoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
- Taber v. BaileyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1913
- Rivard v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1914
- Paterson v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF MONTECITO UNION SCH. DIST.California Court of Appeal · 1958
- Rankin v. TaylorSupreme Court of Iowa · 1927
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.