Wittenbrock

Wittenbrock v. Cass

Good Law
110 Cal. 1·1895 Cal. LEXIS 1006·42 P. 300
Supreme Court of CaliforniaNovember 7, 1895No. 18331California1,410 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Belcher, J.

On March 7, 1892, Maria Louisa Cass borrowed of the plaintiff two thousand dollars, for which she executed to him her promissory note and a mortgage to secure payment of the same on certain real property in the city of Sacramento. Mrs. Cass died in May, 1892, and thereafter the defendant, William H. Cass, was duly appointed administrator of her estate. In March, 1893, plaintiff commenced this action to foreclose his said mortgage, making William H. Cass, as administrator and individually, a party defendant.

The case was tried and judgment of foreclosure rendered as prayed for, from which and from an order deny *4 ing his motion for a new trial the defendant appeals. The defendant answered the complaint, and then, by way of cross-coinplaint, set up in substance the following facts: That Maria Louisa Gass was the mother of defendant, and in October, 1882, was seventy-two years of age, infirm in body, without a home, and greatly in need of care and attention; that she had about three thousand seven hundred dollars in money and no other property; that then and there it was agreed between her and defendant that she should purchase in her own name and with her own means a certain lot…

Concurring Opinion

McFarland, J.

concurred on the authority of Bury v. Young, supra, which must now be taken as final on the subject.

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.