Hink

Hink v. Superior Court

Good Law
1962 Cal. LEXIS 322·23 Cal. Rptr. 771·58 Cal. 2d 921·373 P.2d 859
Supreme Court of CaliforniaAugust 2, 1962L. A. No. 26757California501 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

White, J.

This is a petition for writs of prohibition and mandate by interveners Marvin B. Hink and Aldena Lauten, upon facts and following proceedings in respondent court similar to those in Chance v. Superior Court, this day decided, ante, p. 275 [ 23 Cal.Rptr. 761 , 373 P.2d 849 ], It has been stipulated that Chance and Hink may be determined together as companion eases. Plaintiffs and real parties in interest are Mary A. Ford and other individuals situated similarly to the plaintiffs and real parties in the Chance case. Real parties in interest have demurred as well as filed extensive material in answer to the instant petition. Alternative writs of prohibition and mandate were issued, following the trial court’s determination that a class foreclosure action was permissible herein. The stipulations referred to in the companion ease apply equally to the instant ease.

The class foreclosure suit in the proceeding at bar involves the Bell Canyon Ranchos tract, upon which 302 identical deeds of trust securing notes were issued, each with a face value of $4,000. The total face amount of the trust deeds involved is thus $1,208,000 upon a total area stated to contain 64 acres. This tract also…

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.