Brill

Brill v. Shively

Caution
1892 Cal. LEXIS 624·93 Cal. 674·29 P. 324
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMarch 25, 1892No. 14558California340 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Sharpstein, J.

This appeal is from a judgment and order denying defendants’ motion for a new trial in an action to foreclose a mortgage executed by defendants to plaintiff. -The mortgage embraces two distinct tracts *675 of land, which, for convenience, we shall designate as tracts 1 and 2. Upon tract 2 there was a mortgage prior to plaintiff’s, which was foreclosed before this action was commenced. In that action plaintiff was made a party, as claiming some interest subsequent to and subject to the lien of the plaintiff in that action. The plaintiff herein filed an answer in that action, in which he set out the mortgage which he held upon said tracts 1 and 2, and prayed that if any surplus should remain after applying the same to the amounts due on said prior mortgage the same be applied to the payment of the mortgage of the plaintiff herein, defendant in said action, to foreclose said prior mortgage.

It nowhere appears that tract 1 was in any way involved in the action to foreclose the mortgage prior to the plaintiff’s on said tract 2, but appellants contend that the judgment in that case is a bar to this action, and that the court below erred in holding that it is not. It is sufficiently…

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.