Holt

Holt v. Holt

Good Law
120 Cal. 67·1898 Cal. LEXIS 712·52 P. 119
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 11, 1898L. A. No. 256California749 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

McFarland, J.

This action was brought to reform a deed executed by the plaintiff to the defendant, Frances M. Holt, Tyler being made a defendant as a subsequent mortgagee with no *68 tice. The court rendered judgment for plaintiff, and the defendants appeal from the judgment and from an order denying their motion for a new trial. . .

The findings of the court were warranted by the evidence. The plaintiff and the defendant, Frances, were at one time husband and wife, and had been divorced before the occurrences out. of which this litigation arises. The land involved here, designated as lot 7 of a certain tract, was separate property of the plaintiff, though defendant Frances had filed a homestead thereon, the plaintiff not joining therein. By the decree of divorce the lot was set apart to the defendant, Frances, “for a limited period, to wit, the term, of fifteen years,” but it contained the following provision: “Provided, that if the plaintiff will convey to. the defendant an undivided and unencumbered one-half interest in said homestead, then said term will be shortened to five months.” For the purpose of complying with this provision, the plaintiff executed a deed to the defendant, Frances,…

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.