Opinion

de Racouillat v. Rene

  • 32 Cal. 450
Court
California Supreme Court
Filed
Jul 1, 1867
Status
Published
Author
Currey
On the bench
Currey, Sawyer
Cited by
10 cases
Authority
More cited than 25.9%

The opinion

Currey, C. J., dissenting:

In my judgment, the answer, when examined as a whole, does not traverse the allegation of the complaint charging him with notice of the existence of the instrument bearing date the 13th of March, 1851. He first lays the foundation for his denial of notice by denying that such instrument was a mortgage, and then says in substance that he had not notice of the mortgage. The case, in my opinion, falls within B rown v. Scott, 25 Cal. 189 . I am of opinion the judgment should be reversed and a judgment entered for the plaintiffs, declaring the premises subject to the mortgage. I may hereafter express my opinion more fully on the subject.

Mr. Justice Sanderson did not express any opinion.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.