gno.law

Allen v. Phelps

California Supreme Court · · 1854-07-15 · Published · 4 Cal. 257

ROBERT ALLEN v. BETHUEL PHELPS any PAUL SHIRLEY

Area
civil
Panel
Heydeneeldt (author), William J. Murray, Jr.

Analysis

No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.

Opinion — Heydeneeldt

Mr. Justice Heydeneeldt delivered the opinion of the Court.

Mr. Ch. J. Murray concurred.

The case rests simply upon the fact, whether the action of Semple v. Stewart & Cooke, was for the enforcement of the former’s lien in equity, or a mere action at law, for the *recovery of the money ? From the language [259] used in the findings of the Judge, we are bound to infer the latter, because it is not distinctly expressive of the former. Error must be clearly manifest, and will not be implied.

The position that the purchaser, at Sheriff’s sale should be subrogated to Semple’s equitable lien, cannot be taken in this suit; if available at all,, it must be made so, in a separate equitable action.

Judgment affirmed.