Tiffin

Zenda Mining and Milling Co. v. Tiffin

Good Law
11 Cal. App. 62·1909 Cal. App. LEXIS 77·104 P. 10
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 21, 1909Civ. No. 622.California1,443 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Shaw, J.

On November 28, 1903, defendant Tiffin had docketed in Kern county a deficiency judgment against George W. Cummings. On September 25, 1905, claiming that Cummings had, after the docketing of the judgment, acquired an interest in certain mining property situated in Kern county, the title to which then stood in the name of plaintiff, to which the lien of his judgment had attached, defendant had an execution issued and caused the same to be levied upon said mining property,-and sold to satisfy said judgment so docketed against Cummings. At the sale defendant became the purchaser thereof; whereupon plaintiff brought this action to quiet title. Judgment went in favor of plaintiff, from which defendant prosecutes an appeal upon the judgment-roll.

The ease was tried upon an agreed statement of facts, from which it appears that on September 8th, prior to the docketing of said judgment, Benjamin G. Parlow entered into an agreement with Cummings whereby he agreed to sell and convey to the latter an undivided 26/48 interest in said mining property, together with certain water rights and millsite connected therewith. The consideration for such proposed sale was $8,920, $3,500 of which was…

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.