Randolph v. Kraemer

California Supreme Court Mar 6, 1895 No. No. 19447Published

Before: Vanclief

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The superior court maintains original jurisdiction over an action for a statutory penalty under Civil Code section 2941 when the pleadings raise a material issue regarding the title to real property, regardless of the penalty amount.

Issues

Whether the superior court lacked jurisdiction over an action for a statutory penalty of one hundred dollars after the plaintiff waived claims for additional damages.
Whether the superior court has jurisdiction when the pleadings put the title to real property in issue.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The plaintiff could not have recovered the penalty of one hundred dollars under section 2941 of the Civil Code without proving that he had become the owner of the mortgaged land, his allegation of such ownership being denied.”

“The superior court, therefore, had original jurisdiction of the cause of action for the penalty, though the amount of such penalty was less than three hundred dollars.”

Synopsis

Action for Refusal to Satisfy Mortgage—Damages—Statutory Penalty—Issue as to Title—Waiver of Damages—Nonsuit—Jurisdiction.—In an action brought to recover damages for the refusal of a mortgagor to execute a satisfaction of the mortgage, and also to recover the statutory penalty of one hundred dollars allowed for such refusal, where the answer put in issue plaintiff’s title to the mortgaged land, and the plaintiff waived all claim for damages except for the statutory penalty, a motion for nonsuit on the ground that the court had no jurisdiction to enforce the statutory penalty in a sum less than three hundred dollars, is properly overruled, and a judgment for the statutory penalty will be affirmed, the superior court having original jurisdiction to enforce the penalty in an action in which plaintiff’s title to the land is denied.

Vanclief, C. This action was brought under section 2941 of the Civil Code, of which the following is a copy:

“ Sec. 2941. When any mortgage has been satisfied ■the mortgagee or his assignee must immediately, on the demand of the mortgagor, execute, acknowledge, and deliver to him a certificate of the discharge thereof, so as to entitle it to be recorded, or he must enter satisfaction, or cause satisfaction of such mortgage to be entered of record; and any mortgagee, or assignee of such mortgagee, who refuses to execute, acknowledge, and deliver to the mortgagor the certificate of discharge, or to enter satisfaction, or cause satisfaction of the mortgage to be entered, as provided in this chapter, is liable to the mortgagor, or his grantee or heirs, for all damages which he or they may sustain by reason of such refusal, and shall also forfeit to him or them the sum of one hundred dollars.”

It is alleged in the complaint that one W. H. Shinn mortgaged to defendants a tract of land of eighty acres; and that afterwards plaintiff, by purchase, became and still is the owner of the land; that Shinn paid the mortgage debt and demanded of defendants a certificate of discharge of the mortgage, or that they cause satisfaction of the mortgage to be entered of record, with which demand the defendants refused and still refuse to comply, to the damage of the plaintiff in the sum of two thousand five hundred dollars for which, and also for the statutory penalty of one hundred dollars, the plaintiff demands judgment.

By their verified answer the defendants denied, among [201]other things, that plaintiff became or still is the owner of the land.

The plaintiff had judgment for only the statutory penalty of one hundred dollar's, without costs.

Defendants appeal from the judgment on the judgment-roll containing a bill of exceptions.

The bill of exceptions shows that when the cause was called for trial by the court, and before any evidence was offered, “the plaintiff, by his counsel, renounced, relinquished, and waived all claim and demand in or upon his complaint, except the sum of one hundred dollars statutory penalty for the failure to satisfy the mortgage as alleged in the complaint.”

Thereupon the defendants moved for judgment of nonsuit, “ on the ground that the court had no jurisdiction of the action, the sum demanded being less than three hundred dollars.”

Randolph v. Kraemer

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief