Hopkins v. Warner
California Supreme Court
109 Cal. 133, 41 P. 868 (1895)
- Written by Daniel Clark, JD
Facts
H. C. Warner (defendant) borrowed money from Hopkins (plaintiff) in exchange for a promissory note. Warner executed a mortgage on land he owned in favor of Hopkins to secure the note. Warner then sold the land to third parties (transferees) (defendants). As part of the transaction, Warner and the transferees executed a document in which the transferees agreed to assume responsibility for the mortgage debt. The debt went into default, and Hopkins sued to foreclose. Hopkins, in his foreclosure suit, listed both Warner and Hopkins as defendants and sought a ruling from the court allowing Hopkins to pursue a deficiency judgment against the transferees directly. The trial court issued such a ruling, and the transferees appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Harrison, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 830,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
