Whitehouse

Whitehouse v. Whitehouse

Good Law
1913 Cal. App. LEXIS 101·22 Cal. App. 565·135 P. 509
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 13, 1913Civ. No. 1138.California1,432 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Chipman, J.

The nature of the action fully appears from the findings of fact by the court which follow quite closely the averments of the complaint: “That, on March 5, 1905, plaintiff, Cordelia Whitehouse, purchased from Louise Kramer and C. L. Kramer, for and on behalf of herself and her coplaintiff, W. T. Whitehouse, for the sum of one hundred dollars,” lot 2 of block 9 in the town of Caeheville, Yolo County, the property in question; that plaintiff, Cordelia, “borrowed from defendant the sum of one hundred dollars with which to make payment for said lot and that she paid said one hundred dollars therefor to said C. L. Kramer and Louise Kramer, that being the full purchase price of said lot; that to secure the repayment to the said defendant of the said sum of one hundred dollars so borrowed, the plaintiff, Cordelia Whitehouse, caused the said lot and premises to be conveyed to the said defendant, Samuel Whitehouse, by the said vendors, and the said conveyance was duly executed and acknowledged and thereafter, to wit, on the 6th day of March, A. D. 1905, recorded in the office of the county recorder of said Yolo County”; that the said sum of one hundred dollars, so borrowed of defendant,…

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.