Taylor v. Jones

MELVIN, J.

Plaintiffs sued to quiet title to two parcels of land in Los Angeles County and to cancel and release of record two mortgages upon said property, given by plaintiffs to one L. E. Jones, who assigned the said mortgages for their face value to Bridget Donnelly, the defendant. It was alleged, in the complaint that plaintiffs, who are husband and wife, were the owners of the two lots in question, that two mortgages aggregating about one thousand nine hundred dollars were of record and constituted liens against each of the said lots; that about January 1, 1909, plaintiffs applied to L. E. Jones for a loan of four thousand dollars to pay off the said mortgages; that Jones expressed his ability and willingness to loan four thousand dollars to plaintiffs; that he promised to pay the existing encumbrances, the cost of having the title certified to date, and other expenses including insurance, if plaintiffs would execute in his favor two notes each for two thousand dollars and each supported by a mortgage upon one of the two lots; and that the difference, if any, between said payments and four thousand dollars should be paid by Jones to plaintiffs. The complaint further avers that, relying upon the promises and representations of Jones, plaintiffs on or about January 4, 1909,. made and executed the notes and mortgages in accordance with the suggestions of Jones, naming him therein as mortgagee; that these mortgages were recorded; that subsequently the notes and mortgages were

[110]

assigned by Jones to Bridget Donnelly, the defendant; that the representations and promises of Jones with reference to the payment of the debts of plaintiffs and the removal of the liens of the earlier mortgages from their lots were false and fraudulent; and that plaintiffs received no consideration whatever for the notes and mortgages given by them to Jones and by him assigned to Bridget Donnelly.

Defendant answered admitting that she had received assignments of the notes and mortgages and alleging that she had paid the full sum of four -thousand dollars for them. She asserted that plaintiffs had received full consideration for the notes and mortgages executed by them in favor of Jones. Two separate affirmative defenses were pleaded, in one of which it was alleged that Jones had acted throughout the transaction as the agent of plaintiffs; and-in the other that the defendant had purchased without notice of any equities in favor of the plaintiffs and in full belief that Jones was the owner of the notes and mortgages.