Commercial Bank of Madera v. Redfield

Citations

• 122 Cal. 405
• 55 P. 160
• 1898 Cal. LEXIS 598

Syllabus

<p>Appeal—Review of Evidence—Bill of Exceptions—Specifications.—• A bill of exceptions containing no specifications of the insufficiency of the evidence to justify the decision, cannot be considered upon appeal for the purpose of reviewing the evidence embodied therein.</p> <p>Id .—Admissibility of Evidence—Harmless Rulings.—Rulings against the admissibility of evidence are harmless, where the same facts are subsequently proved and included in the findings.</p> <p>Id.—Review of Findings—Probative and Ultimate Facts.—In reviewing the sufficiency of the findings to support the judgment, regard will be had to the ultimate facts found, and not to mere probative facts, which are not shown by the findings to be the only facts proved, from which alone the court finds the ultimate facts; and in the absence of such showing, the mere circumstance that some of the probative facts are inconsistent with the ultimate facts, will not prevent the ultimate facts found from controlling the probative facts.</p> <p>Foreclosure of Mortgage—Assumption of Mortgage Debt by Grantees —Deficiency Judgment.—Deeds of mortgaged premises merely specifying that the lands conveyed are “subject to the mortgage,” do not create any assumption of the mortgage debt by the grantees, or subject them to a deficiency judgment upon foreclosure of the mortgage.</p> <p>Id.—Subsequent Verbal Promise by Grantee—Want of Consideration —Forbearance to Sue.—A subsequent verbal promise by the grantee to pay the mortgage debt, made without consideration, is not binding; and a subsequent voluntary forbearance of the plaintiff to sue, not based upon any promise of the grantee to pay the debt, nor made a condition thereof, cannot support the promise.</p>