Skip to main content
· 7/1/1868

Perkins v. Center

Citations

  • 35 Cal. 713
  • 1868 Cal. LEXIS 150

Syllabus

<p>Redemption of Land—Redemptioner—Fraud, and Effect, of.—A mortgage was executed by the husband uponv certain real property situated in the City and County of San Francisco, being the community property of the husband and wife, who were thereafter divorced from the bonds of matrimony, and one half the community property was awarded to the wife by the decree of said divorce. Thereafter the mortgage was duly foreclosed, and thereunder the mortgaged property sold to R.; from which sale a redemption was made by S., by the procurement of the husband and one C., the husband having for that purpose fraudulently confessed a judgment in favor of S., without being indebted to him, and C. furnished the money with which said redemption was made. Subsequently, the wife procured a redemption to be made from S., through F., to whom, for that purpose, she made an assignment of her judgment for costs and alimony, rendered in the divorce suit, which had been rendered in another county, but without docketing said judgment in the City and County of San Francisco. Subsequently, one Cochran, as the secret agent'of the husband and C., and who had full knowledge of the foregoing facts, and to whom C. had furnished money to purchase another mortgage debt upon said property which had been contracted by the husband after the granting of said decree of divorce, redeemed from F. Said first and third redemptions were procured by the husband and C. to be made for the fraudulent purpose of divesting the wife of her interest in said property, of which fact, and the particular means of its intended accomplishment, the wife was ignorant during said periods. Held, first, that in equity the redemption by S. was a redemption by the husband, and extinguished the lien of said mortgage; second, that the redemption by F. was nugatory, because of the failure to docket said judgment in the City and County of San Francisco; third, that although Cochran was a legal redemptioner—he having become the legal holde

Judges: Crockett

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.