Curtin v. Salmon River Hydraulic Gold Mining & Ditch Co.
California Supreme Court
The main facts are stated in the opinion of the court rendered in the foreclosure suit, Curtin v. Salmon River etc. Co., 130 Cal. 345.1 Further facts as to ratification of the note sued upon are stated in the opinion of the court in this case.
1Opinion of the Court
HENSHAW, J.—
This was an action upon a promissory note executed by the corporation to Thomas W. Wells, one of its directors, and by him assigned after maturity to plaintiff herein. An action was prosecuted by this plaintiff to foreclose a mortgage given by the corporation to secure the note. The decision of this court upon that action will be found reported in the 130th volume of our Reports, at page 345. That opinion contains all of the facts pertinent to the present consideration. It was there held that the mortgage was void. But while the note and the attempted mortgage were executed at the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Hotel Co. v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Union Pac. Ry. Co. v. Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1892
- Blood v. La Serena Land & Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1896
- Greig v. RiordanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Crowley v. Genesee Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1880
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Rakestraw v. RodriguesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
- Adams v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1928
- Brown v. World ChurchCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
- Commercial Security Co. v. Modesto Drug Co.California Court of Appeal · 1919
- Dickinson v. Zubiate Mining Co.California Court of Appeal · 1909
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.