Seccombe

Seccombe v. Roe

Good Law
1913 Cal. App. LEXIS 43·22 Cal. App. 139·133 P. 507
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 19, 1913Civ. No. 1302.California1,547 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Allen, J.

This action was to recover the balance due upon a promissory note originally secured by a deed of trust; it being alleged that upon default in the payment of the note by defendants the property described in the deed of trust was sold and the net proceeds derived from said sale applied upon such note. An affidavit was filed with the complaint herein sufficient in form to authorize the issuance of a writ of attachment, which writ was issued and levied upon the property of defendants. Thereafter defendants moved to discharge the attachment upon the ground that the statements contained in the affidavit for attachment were untrue. The court upon the hearing of such motion granted the same, and from the order discharging the attachment plaintiff appeals.

A determination of the controlling question presented upon this appeal depends upon the effect which should be given the stipulation in the deed of trust securing the obligation, which in terms provides that before sale said trustee should publish notice of the time and place of sale at least once a week for four successive weeks. It was stipulated upon the hearing of the motion to discharge the attachment that publication was made on…

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.