Kent

Kent v. Williams

Good Law
114 Cal. 537·1896 Cal. LEXIS 939·46 P. 462
Supreme Court of CaliforniaOctober 14, 1896Sac. No. 102California1,066 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

McFarland, J.

Judgment was rendered for plaintiffs, but, on motion of the defendant the San Francisco Savings Union, a new trial was granted. From the order granting a new trial the plaintiffs appealed. The action was brought to foreclose what is alleged to be a mortgage executed by the defendant Williams to the plaintiffs upon certain property in Fresno county. The main facts in the case are these: On the twelfth day of April, 1888, the plaintiffs, being the owners of certain real property in Oakland, Alameda county, made a written contract with defendant Williams, by which they *540 agreed to sell him said property for the sum of twenty-two thousand five hundred dollars, for which Williams gave them his note, payable on or before April 12,1891, and plaintiffs agreed to give to said Williams a conveyance of said property upon the payment of the full amount of said note. The said written contract contains this clause: “The said party of the second part [Williams] agrees to deposit with the First National Bank of Oakland, California, a deed in escrow in favor of said parties of the first part, of an undivided one-quarter interest in seventeen hundred and thirty acres, covering the greater…

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.