Legal Opinion

Hooper v. Stump

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided August 18, 1887No. Civil No. 196PublishedCited by 4 opinions

APPEAL from a Judgment of the County Court in and for the County of Cochise. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtPorter, J.

This is an action on a note, and to foreclose *264a mortgage, upon non-payment of the interest on the note before the principal sum was due, the terms of which note and the mortgage in part are as follows:

“This conveyance is intended as a mortgage to secure payment of a certain promissory note of even date herewith, in words and figures as follows, to-wit: ‘$3,387.20.’-

July 1, 1885.

“ ‘On or before two years after date we promise to pay J. W. Hooper or order at Los Angeles, California, three thousand three hundred eighty-seven twenty one-hundredths dollars, gold coin of the United States, for…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Railroad Co. v. SpragueSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
  2. Williams v. . TownsendNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
  3. Brickell v. BatchelderCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Mercantile Trust Co. v. San Joaquin Agricultural Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1928
  2. Holman v. RobertsArizona Supreme Court · 1929
  3. Copper Belle Mining Co. v. CostelloArizona Supreme Court · 1909
  4. Davis v. DodsonArizona Supreme Court · 1894

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

Powered by the Exa API