Blumberg

Blumberg v. Birch

Good Law
1893 Cal. LEXIS 681·99 Cal. 416·34 P. 102
Supreme Court of CaliforniaAugust 31, 1893No. 19164California1,011 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Belcher, J.

It is alleged iu the amended complaint in this case that, on the thirteenth day of August, 1887, the defendant executed and delivered to the plaintiff his promissory note and a mortgage on certain real property to secure payment of the same; that on the 15th of December, 1890, the plaintiff commenced an action against the defendant in the superior court of Ventura County to foreclose the said mortgage, and that a summons in the action was issued and served on the defendant by publication only, he being then a non-resident of this state and absent therefrom; that defendant did not appear iu the action, and, after the time allowed by law for him to appear and answer or demur, his default was duly entered by order of the court; that the court then heard proof of plaintiff’s demand set out in his complaint, and examined him on oath respecting any payments that had been made on account *417 of such demand, and thereupon made and entered in the action its decree of foreclosure in the usual form; that under this decree, on March 27, 1891, an order of sale was duly issued to the sheriff of the county and in pursuance thereof the sheriff advertised for sale, and on April 27, 1891, sold the…

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.