Legal Opinion

Walker v. Houston

California Supreme Court

Decided June 30, 1932No. Docket No. L.A. 11024PublishedCited by 33 opinions

William Ellis Lady and Koenig & Brunton for Defendants and Respondents.

1Opinion of the CourtLangdon, J.

This action was brought to foreclose a chattel mortgage. Between January 2, 1924, and March 8, 1924, defendants Houston, lessees of an apartment house, purchased certain furniture from defendant Eastern Outfitting Company on conditional sale, for a total price of $9,150, payable in installments. On May 31, 1924, defendants Houston executed a promissory note for $2,500 to plaintiff, secured by a chattel mortgage on all of the furniture in the apartment house, the bulk of which was still being paid for under the conditional sales contracts. The mortgage was properly executed and recorded. It…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. City of Sacramento v. ClunieCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Loughborough v. McNevinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
  3. Leet v. ArmbrusterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  4. Sayward v. HoughtonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  5. In re the Estate of RoseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887

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

3Cited by33 opinions

  1. Baucum v. Great American Insurance Co. of New YorkTexas Supreme Court · 1963
  2. Sherman v. QuinnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  3. Highland Plastics, Inc. v. EndersAppellate Division of the Superior Court of California · 1980
  4. Landis Machine Co. v. Omaha Merchants Transfer Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1942
  5. County of San Diego v. DavisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934

28 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