Bunnel v. Stockton
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Lassen.county, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtWorks, J.
Appeal from a decree foreclosing a mortgage on real estate, and from an order denying the defendants a new trial.
The case was decided against the appellants on a former hearing, on the ground that the homestead relied upon by the defendants was void, for the reason that the declaration thereof did not contain an estimate of the cash value of the property, as required by section 1263 of the Civil Code. (Knock v. Bunnell, 21 Pac. Rep. 961.) It was discovered, subsequently, that at the time this homestead was declared the statute did not require a statement of the value of the property, and a…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Quivey v. GambertCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
- Chase v. EvoyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
- Cooney v. FurlongCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
- Knock v. BunnellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
3Cited by9 opinions
- Kramm v. Stockton Electric R. R. Co.California Court of Appeal · 1913
- Henry v. MerguireCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Cameron v. Arcata & Mad River RailroadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Freese v. FreeseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- Wheeler v. KarnesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.