Schluter v. Harvey
CLAUS SCHLUTER v. CHARLES HARVEY, and HENRY BAUMGARTEN, and J. L. MUTH
- Area
- civil
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
The Court.
—1. It is urged by appellant that the respondent cannot claim to be a purchaser in good faith and for a valuable consideration, because the cancellation of a pre-existing indebtedness is not a valuable consideration within the meaning of section 1214 of the Civil Code. But it is the law of this State that such pre-existing debt is a valuable consideration. (Frey v. Clifford, 44 Cal. 335.)
2. It is further insisted that the facts showing respondent to be a purchaser for a valuable consideration were not sufficiently pleaded by him. But there was an attempt to plead them, to which no objection was taken by demurrer or otherwise in the *160court below, nor was any objection made to the evidence of respondent tending to prove that he was a purchaser bona fide and for a valuable consideration.
3. There was evidence to sustain a finding that respondent had no actual notice of the grant to appellant.
4. It is claimed by appellant that the law of this State does not authorize the practice pursued or judgment rendered in this proceeding. In our opinion the action was authorized and the proceeding accords with section 386 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Judgment and order affirmed.
Cites, in this corpus
- Frey v. Clifford No. 3,035 · 1872-07-01
Cited by
- Hancock Oil Co. v. Hopkins L. A. 18087 · 1944-07-13
- Pacific National Bank v. Corona National Bank Docket No. 181. · 1931-04-10
- Popp v. Exchange Bank S. F. No. 9597. · 1922-07-11
- Commercial National Bank v. Roberts Civ. No. 3460. · 1920-11-10
- Fowles v. National Bank of California L.A. No. 3182. · 1914-04-11
- Spangler v. Spangler Civ. No. 660. · 1909-09-16
- Stroud v. Thomas S.F. No. 2703. · 1903-06-13
- San Joaquin Lumber Co. v. Welton Sac. No. 104 · 1896-11-07
- Mini v. Mini Sac. No. 53 · 1896-09-03
- Hughes v. Alsip Sac. No. 29 · 1896-05-09
- Kennedy v. Conroy Sac. No. 58 · 1896-04-28
- Riley v. Martinelli No. 18084 · 1893-03-21
- Foorman v. Wallace No. 9891 · 1888-04-20
- Gassen v. Hendrick No. 12305 · 1887-12-29