Bennett

Bennett v. San Ramon Valley Bank

Good Law
79 Cal. App. 458·250 P. 188
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 11, 1926Docket No. 5541.California1,261 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Sturtevant, J.

This is an action in conversion. The judgment went for the defendants and the plaintiff has appealed.

The plaintiff executed a writing in words and figures as follows, to wit:

As stated above, sixty-six acres were included in the agreements to sell mentioned above. Ninety-eight acres remained unsold. The plaintiff was indebted to the bank on unsecured promissory notes in the sum of $8,000. The entire property was covered by two mortgages. One mortgage was in favor of M. S. Netto, given to secure the payment of a promissory note for $14,500, dated April 7, 1919, payable five years after date with interest at 5 per cent per annum computed annually. The second mortgage was .given/' to secure the payment of a promissory note for $3,300, dated March 1, 1920, payable on or before four years after date with interest at 6 per cent per annum computed annually. There were also some small statutory liens incurred in campaigns to destroy squirrels. No sale of the ninety-eight acres having been made, the plaintiff executed another written instrument in words and figures as follows:

Soon after the second instrument was signed the defendant bank obtained a purchaser who made an initial…

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.