Hoult

Hoult v. Ramsbottom

Good Law
127 Cal. 171·1899 Cal. LEXIS 619·59 P. 587
Supreme Court of CaliforniaDecember 13, 1899Sac. No. 693.California1,850 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Chipman, J.

Plaintiff brings this action for an accounting with defendant Ramsbottom; also for judgment against him for the surplus resulting from the proceeds coming into his hands upon the foreclosure of certain mortgages held by him as collateral security for plaintiff’s debt; also for an assignment to plaintiff of a certain deficiency judgment arising out of said foreclosure proceedings, and for general relief. The court found as facts that Ramsbottom loaned plaintiff two thousand dollars' and directed plaintiff to execute and deliver to defendant Sum merville his promissory note therefor, which was done; that as security for said note Eamsbottom directed plaintiff to assign to Summerville a certain note executed by W. J. and J. F. Hoult to plaintiff for five thousand five hundred dollars, together with a certain mortgage on real estate and a certain chattel mortgage, both given by said W. J. and J. F. to plaintiff to secure said last-mentioned note; that Summerville had no interest in the transaction and was acting merely as Bamsbottom’s agent, except that subsequently in certain foreclosure proceedings he acted, through his attorney, defendant Webster, for the benefit of plaintiff.…

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.