Bloomquist v. Haley

California Supreme Court May 28, 1928 No. Docket No. L.A. 10253.Published

Before: Curtis

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed a judgment for unlawful detainer, holding that the defendants' claim of a vendor's lien was invalid and that the defendants' failure to deny the complaint's allegations regarding the assignment of the lease constituted an admission.

Issues

Whether the defendants held a valid vendor's lien on the property under section 3046 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Whether the evidence supported the finding that the lease was assigned to the appellants.
Whether the trial court committed prejudicial error by failing to include a provision in the judgment delaying execution for five days.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“In view of our decision in Haley v. Bloomquist, supra, this defense is not available.”

“This provision does not affect the contents of the judgment. It merely regulates the time of issuance of execution after judgment”

CURTIS, J.

Hearings in this action and the two companion actions of

Haley

Bloomquist,

L. A. No. 9584,

post,

[252]

p. 253 [268 Pac. 365], and

Bloomquist

Haley,

L. A. No. 9585,

post,

p. 258 [268 Pac. 364], were granted by. this court after decision thereof by the district court of appeal, in and for the second appellate district, second division. The hearings were granted mainly for the reason that we were in doubt as to the correctness of the opinion of the district court of appeal in said action of

Haley

Bloomquist,

L. A. No. 9584. But, desiring to have all three related cases before us upon our final consideration of the action of

Bloomquist

Haley,

L. A. No. 9585, we granted hearings in all of them. After considering the opinions rendered by said district court of appeal in this action and in that of

Haley

Bloomquist,

L. A. 9584, we are satisfied with the correctness of said opinions, and we hereby adopt the same as the opinions of this court. The opinion in this action as written by Mr. Justice Craig is as follows:

Bloomquist v. Haley

AI Brief

CURTIS, J.

L. A. No. 9584,

L. A. No. 9585,

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief