Homan

Homan v. Wayer320

Caution
1908 Cal. App. LEXIS 35·9 Cal. App. 123·98 P. 80
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 28, 1908Civ. No. 307.California2,383 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Taggart, J.

This is an action brought to recover from the defendant Wayer, as a notary public, and the defendant corporation as surety on his notarial bond, the sum of $550, damages alleged to have been sustained by reason of a false and deceptive certificate of acknowledgment made by said notary. Judgment was for plaintiff, and defendants appeal from the judgment and from an order denying their motion for a new trial.

On the twenty-eighth day of November, 1903, plaintiff, who was then living in Omaha, Nebraska, purchased from one J. A. Overholtzer, who was acting under the assumed name of Carl Anderson, five acres of land located in Pasadena, California. The transaction took place in Omaha, and Overholtzer as evidence of his title presented an abstract of title made by the Pomona Abstract and Trust Company showing title in the premises vested in Mary E. Griswold and a grant, bargain and sale deed from Mary E. Griswold .to Carl Anderson, dated September 26, 1903. To the latter was attached the certificate of acknowledgment in question, wherein defendant Wayer, as a notary public of Los Angeles county, California, certified in the usual form, under date of September 26, 1903, “before me, . .…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.