Carpenter

Carpenter v. M. J. & M. & M., Consolidated

Good Law
129 C.C.A. 388·212 F. 868·1914 U.S. App. LEXIS 2138
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 16, 1914No. 2277California2,207 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Morrow, J.

(after stating the facts as above). [1] The controversy in this case grows out of a certificate of purchase issued by the state of California on March 20> 1889, to one S. .Davis, a resident of Sacramento, in the state of California, for a section of school land located in Kern county in that state. On April 1, 1890, Davis assigned this certificate to one .Charles H. Gilman. Davis had paid 20 per cent, of the purchase price of the land, and interest in advance to the 1st day of January, 1890. On August 25, 1892, the annual installments of interest, which became due in advance on January 1st of 1890, 1891, and 1892, being unpaid and delinquent, the district attorney for Kern county commenced an action in the superior court of that county on behalf of the state to obtain a judgment foreclosing the interest of Davis in and to said certificate of purchase, and canceling and declaring the same null and void, and' adjudging that all persons claiming under said Davis, subsequent to the execution of said certificate of purchase, either as purchasers, in-cumbrancers, or otherwise, be barred and foreclosed of ’all right, claim, or equity of redemption in and to such certificate of…

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.