Legal Opinion

Burgess v. Fairbanks

California Supreme Court

Decided February 27, 1890No. 13262PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Trinity County. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtMcFarland, J.

— This is an action to enforce a vendor’s lien for balance of unpaid purchase-money. Judgment was for plaintiff, and defendants appeal from the judgment on the judgment roll alone.

The complaint is sufficient. It avers clearly enough that plaintiff sold the land to the defendant George E. White for $4,150; that of said purchase-money said White paid plaintiff $2,400, and also, according to the terms of *216the sale, paid to one McMurray $1,025, due on a mortgage on the land, and that the balance, $750, with interest, is due and unpaid; that at the time of the sale, for reasons known to the said…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Sparks v. HessCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
  2. Bean v. Pioneer Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1885
  3. Heirs v. CarpenterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1857

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Southern Pacific Co. v. Von Schmidt Dredge Co.California Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Kuschel v. HunterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API