Rousset

Rousset v. Green

Good Law
54 Cal. 136
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJuly 1, 1880No. 5,906California1,042 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Departmentmyrick, J.

The facts in this case are quite numerous, and are detailed at length in the transcript on file. From the view we take of this *138 case it will not be necessary to state them at length. We shall confine ourselves to such as are material.

On and before the 6th day of MarchÍ 1867, the defendant, Green, and his wife, Arabella, were residing upon a tract of land, without title other than possession. December 7th, 1866, a judgment had been docketed against Green in favor of one Murphy for some $10,000, upon which judgment on the 14th of September, 1868, there was a balance due of $3,775.54, with interest thereon from September 3rd, 1866, at the rate of two and one-half per cent, per month, which had been assigned to and was .held by Patterson. March 6th, 1867, Mahoney executed to Felton and Brooks a deed conveying an undivided interest in the Rancho Laguna Merced, equal to eight acres. The residence, and a portion of the claim described in the homestead claim hereinafter mentioned, were within the boundaries of said rancho. March 19th, 1867, Felton and Brooks conveyed to Susan Murphy the same interest they had acquired by the deed from Mahoney. March 18th, 1867, Susan Murphy…

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.