Marriner v. Smith
Before: Sawyer
Synopsis
Removal of Lien of a Judgment from Land. — One who purchases land subject to the lien of a judgment obtained by fraud against his grantor is not entitled to have a Court of equity remove the judgment lien and enjoin a sale of the land under the judgment, unless he shows affirmatively that he will be injured by an enforcement of the lien by a sale of the land on execution.
Lien of Judgment against Husband on the Homestead.—If, while a judgment is standing against the husband, the husband and wife make a sale of the homestead, and at the same time make a relinquishment of the homestead right in the manner required by law, so that the two constitute but one transaction, and the homestead does not exceed in value five thousand dollars, the lien of the judgment will not attach to the homestead, and a Court of equity will enjoin a sale of the samo upon an execution issued on the judgment.
Same.—If husband and wife make a relinquishment of the homestead right, and afterwards sell the homestead property, and the relinquishment takes effect before the sale, the lien of the judgment will attach to the property.
Making up Transcript on Appeal. — If an amended complaint and answer are filed, and no question arises on the original pleadings, it is not necessary to include them in the transcript on appeal. Other abbreviations of transcript are indicated in the opinion.
By the Court, Sawyer, J. On the 16th day of November, 1861, the defendant, Smith, recovered a judgment upon a promissory note in the District Court for the County of Placer, against one D. B. Goode for the sum of four hundred and sixty-four dollars. At the date of said judgment said Goode was the owner of the lands .described in the complaint, which lands constituted his homestead. Subsequent to the entry of said judgment, an instrument of abandonment of said homestead was duly executed and acknowledged by said Goode and wife, and regularly recorded, and the premises were conveyed by said Goode and wife to plaintiffs; but whether tire abandonment and conveyance were contained in one instrument, does not appear. In October, 1863, subsequent to said conveyance, Smith procured an execution to be issued upon his said judgment against Goode, and placed it in the hands of the defendant, Gooding, Sheriff of Placer County, who was proceeding thereunder by the direction of said Smith to sell said lands. Plaintiffs thereupon commenced this action to restrain the sale, and thereby prevent the defendants from further clouding their title, and to procure a cancellation of the judgment as a fraud upon their rights. In addition to the foregoing facts, the - plaintiffs [651]allege in their complaint, that, on the 5th day of November, 1861, after the commencement of said suit by Smith against Goode, and before the entry of judgment therein, said Goode and said Smith settled said suit, and said Goode delivered to said Smith a horse of the value of three hundred dollars, and other property specified, exceeding in value, in the aggregate, the amount due in the matter in suit, and that said Smith accepted the said property in full payment and satisfaction of the entire amount due, and in consideration thereof, agreed with said Goode to dismiss said suit, and that the same should not be further prosecuted; that said Goode, relying upon said promise, and supposing the said suit would be dismissed, paid no further attention to it; that said Smith, in violation of said agreement, and without the knowledge or consent of said Goode, and in fraud of his rights, did, nevertheless, cause said judgment to be entered by default; and that said judgment was thereby obtained by fraud, upon a demand which had been fully paid, satisfied and discharged. The Court found the facts to be as alleged, and rendered a judgment annulling and setting aside the said judgment, also perpetually enjoining any sale under it; from which judgment defendants appeal.
The grounds of appeal are, that the facts alleged in the complaint, and found by the Court, are insufficient to entitle plaintiffs to the judgment rendered, or to any relief.
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)