Ware

Ware v. Julian

Good Law
122 Cal. App. 354·1932 Cal. App. LEXIS 1091·9 P.2d 906
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 5, 1932Docket No. 8261.California1,061 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Dooling, J.

This is an appeal by the defendant, Sue C. Julian, from a decree foreclosing a mortgage made to secure the payment of a promissory note and providing for a deficiency judgment.

Attached to the mortgage was the certificate of acknowledgment in regular form of a notary public reciting that Sue C. Julian, known to him to be a party whose name is subscribed to the within instrument personally appeared before him and acknowledged that she executed the same. In the body of the mortgage a copy of the promissory note was set out in haec verba and as so set out it purports to bear the signature of Sue C. Julian.

Appellant on the trial testified that she had not signed the note or mortgage or appeared before the notary public and acknowledged the execution of the mortgage.

The trial court found that appellant executed and delivered both note and mortgage. Appellant attacks these findings as being without support in the evidence. The certificate of acknowledgment attached to the mortgage was prima facie evidence of its due execution (Code Civ. Proc., see. 1951; Thomas v. Fursman, 177 Cal. 550 [ 171 Pac. 301 ]), and the only question is whether the certificate of acknowledgment standing…

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.