Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

57 Cal. 141

Grant v. White

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1880

California Supreme Court · decided 1880-07-01

<p>Appeal from a judgment for the plaintiff, in the First District Court, County of San Luis Obispo. Fawcett, J.</p>

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently September 1889

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1880-07-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

The Court :

¶1We are of opinion that no ground appears for setting aside the default of the defendant Sarah L. White. It does not appear but that Mr. Venable was authorized to represent her. We do not see that fraud or imposition was practiced upon her at the time of the execution of the mortgage, and we are of opinion that there was nothing improper in the professional conduct of Mr. Venable. We think the rule regarding the execution of instruments by married women is correctly stated by Mr. J ones in his work on Mortgages, § 538.

¶2Judgment and order affirmed.

/57/cal/141 · .json · Public domain