Harms

Harms v. Grant

Good Law
1919 Cal. App. LEXIS 206·39 Cal. App. 372·178 P. 968
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 14, 1919Civ. No. 1941.California613 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Chipman, J.

Foreclosure. On May 16, 1913, defendant executed and delivered to plaintiff his promissory note for the sum of five thousand dollars, payable one year after date, at eight per cent interest per annum, and, at the same time, to secure the payment thereof, executed and delivered to plaintiff a deed absolute to certain real property. Contemporaneously the parties entered into a written agreement setting forth that the said deed was intended as a mortgage to secure the payment of said promissory note, and incorporating in the agreement substantially the provisions found in long-form mortgages.

The only defense to the action, as shown by the answer, was an alleged oral agreement by the parties, made on July 23, 1915, more than a year after said promissory note had become due and payable. In effect, this alleged agreement was that in consideration of defendant’s finding some person who would loan plaintiff two thousand dollars for the period of one year, to be secured by the assignment of said promissory note and mortgage to the person making such loan, plaintiff would not call upon defendant to pay said promissory note until the expiration of one year, and that defendant would pay…

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.