Penryn Fruit Co. v. Sherman-Worrell Fruit Co.

Good Law
142 Cal. 643·1904 Cal. LEXIS 995·76 P. 484
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMarch 29, 1904Sac. No. 1172.California1,218 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Chipman, J.

The Sherman-Worrell Fruit Company (hereafter called the Sherman Company) did not appear in the action. Defendant Farmers’ and Mechanics’ Savings Bank (hereafter called the bank) demurred to the complaint; the demurrer was sustained, and plaintiff declining to amend, defendant the bank had judgment dismissing the action from which this appeal is taken.

It appears from the complaint that on December 8, 1897, R. B. and Dan T. Sherman, predecessors in interest of the Sherman Company, were owners of certain land planted to fruit-trees in Placer County; on that day they executed to the bank their promissory note for forty-five hundred dollars, and to secure payment of same, executed also on that day their trust-deed conveying the property to certain trustees named in the deed, with power to sell and execute a deed to the purchaser; under this power the trustees sold the property, and on June 15, 1901, a deed of said property was executed and delivered to the bank as purchaser; the bank went into immediate possession of the land and the fruit-crop growing thereon. It further appears that the Sherman Company executed to plaintiff a chattel mortgage on the fruit-crop growing on a portion…

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.