History
  • No items yet
midpage
Browne v. Ferrea
51 Cal. 552
Cal.
1876
Check Treatment

Lead Opinion

By the Court:

Three separate tracts of land were levied on by the sheriff under the execution against the defendant, were advertised as separate tracts, but were sold in a mass as one entire tract. This was an irregularity, to correct which the defendant had his remedy by motion to set aside the sale on notice to the judgment creditor, sheriff, and purchaser at the sale. (Code Civil Procedure, 694.)

To uphold the sale would' be to deprive the judgment debtor of his right to redeem any one of the separate parcels.

Order reversed and cause remanded, with direction to grant the motion.






Dissenting Opinion

Wallace, C. J.,

dissenting:

It does not appear that the defendant had either the purpose or the ability to redeem, and it is affirmatively shown, and is found by the court below, that the premises sold for more than they would bring on a re-sale.
I am of opinion that, for a mere irregularity in the proceedings about the sale, productive of no appreciable damage, the proceeding ought not to be disturbed, especially against a third person purchasing at the sale and paying the purchase money in good faith, and in ignorance of the irregularity now complained of.
I therefore dissent from the judgment given here, and am of opinion that the order made below should be affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Browne v. Ferrea
Court Name: California Supreme Court
Date Published: Jul 1, 1876
Citation: 51 Cal. 552
Docket Number: 5024
Court Abbreviation: Cal.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.