Hotchkiss

Hotchkiss v. Darling

Good Law
130 Cal. App. 625·1933 Cal. App. LEXIS 1053·20 P.2d 343
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 28, 1933Docket No. 847.California970 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Barnard, J.

Plaintiff filed this action to quiet title to certain lots in the city of Selma. The defendants filed a cross-complaint asking that their title be quieted as against the plaintiff. The defendants alleged and proved a sale of the lots to them by a trustee under the terms of a trust deed given by the plaintiff to the defendants to secure a note for $2,500. This appeal is taken from a judgment quieting title to the lots in the defendants, the only questions raised relating to the validity of the sale under the trust deed.

It is first contended that the notice of sale, as published, did not comply with the provision of section 692 of the Code of Civil Procedure requiring such a notice to be published “once a week for the same period”, the period referred to being twenty days. The notice here in question was published three times in a weekly newspaper, on August 15, August 22 and August 29, 1929. It is argued that since but fourteen days elapsed between the first and the last publication, the same was not published “for twenty days”. In Estate of Sankey, 199 Cal. 391 [ 249 Pac. 517, 519 ], it is said: “It is apparent that but two weekly notices could be published during the period of…

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.