Rafferty

Rafferty v. High

Good Law
1895 Cal. LEXIS 1125·5 Cal. Unrep. 113·41 P. 489
Supreme Court of CaliforniaAugust 8, 1895No. 19,469California638 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Vanclief, J.

Action to foreclose two mortgages on the same lot of land, each to secure a distinct promissory note. The rate of interest on each note was fifteen per cent per annum from date of note until payment,, payable and compounded semi-annually, and each note contained the following: “And I further agree that, in the event of suit being brought against me, then there shall be added to any judgment against me rendered in said suit, as counsel fees, an additional sum of ten per centum .... upon the amount of the principal and interest hereof accrued at the time of the entry of such judgment.” Each mortgage was expressly given “as security for the payment of” the principal sum of the note, “with interest thereon according to the terms of the note,” and a copy of the note secured was set out in each mortgage. But-neither mortgage expressly purported to secure the payment of counsel fees in any event. The trial court • allowed plaintiff counsel fees amounting to $178.91, and held that the payment of them was secured by the mortgages, and ordered that they be paid from the proceeds of the foreclosure sale. Counsel for appellants contends that the court erred in holding that counsel fees were…

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.