Schwartz

Schwartz v. Mead

Good Law
116 Cal. App. 606·1931 Cal. App. LEXIS 436·3 P.2d 48
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 15, 1931Docket No. 4294.California3,350 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Plummer, J.

This action was instituted by the plaintiff to foreclose a vendor’s lien upon lot 7, block 1 of tract No. 5647 in the city of Beverly Hills, county of Los Angeles.

The record shows that the defendants Martin H. Mead, Theresa Mead and B. D. O’Niel defaulted, and that a separate judgment was entered against them. Execution thereafter issued and the interest of said defendants in the property above mentioned was sold by the sheriff of Los Angeles County, and a deed thereto executed by the sheriff and delivered to the plaintiff. The judgment upon which execution was issued appears upon its face to have been entered only against the defaulting defendants above named, and contained among other provisions the following limitations as to its effect, to wit: “And it is further adjudged and decreed that this judgment does not affect the rights of any of the defendants not herein specially mentioned, if any such rights any of them have, and as to all defendants other than Martin H. Mead, Theresa Mead and B. D. O’Neil it is hereby ordered, adjudged and decreed that this action may proceed.”

Upon the trial of this action the only evidence in support of the plaintiff’s title was the sheriff’s…

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.