Palmtag

Palmtag v. Roadhouse

Good Law
1893 Cal. LEXIS 1051·4 Cal. Unrep. 205·34 P. 111
Supreme Court of CaliforniaAugust 31, 1893No. 15,018California927 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Searls, J.

This is an action brought to foreclose a mortgage given by the defendants, George W. Roadhouse and wife, to secure a promissory note for $1,550 and interest, made by said defendants, Roadhouse and wife. The note and mortgage were dated March 25, 1885, and the note was payable to Frederika Palmtag, or order, one year after date. The action was commenced July 9, 1890—as may be seen, more than four years after the maturity of the note. Defendants demurred to the complaint upon the ground, among others, that the cause of action was barred by the provisions of section 337 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the state of California. Plaintiff, in her complaint, and with an evident view to avoid the apparent bar of the statute of four years, inserted in her com.plaint the following statement: “That said defendant George W. Roadhouse is an attorney and counselor at law, and engaged in the practice of law at Salinas City, Monterey county, California, and that plaintiff is a widow woman, residing at Watsonville, Santa Cruz county, California, and that the facts set forth in this paragraph have existed for several years last past. That for about five years last past said defendant George W.…

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.