Property Law Keyed to Cribbet
People v. Nogarr
Facts
The Appellant Elaine Wilson and Calvert Wilson (now deceased) owned property as joint tenants until the death of Calvert in 1955. Prior to Calvert’s death, the couple separated in July of 1954, and thereafter, without Elaine’s knowledge or consent, Calvert executed a promissory note to his parents (Respondents) for $6,440, and then delivered a mortgage to his parents on the property in question. In 1956 the People of the State of California commenced this action to condemn the property. The People, in its complaint, alleged that Elaine Wilson was the owner of the real property in question and that the parents of Calvert were the mortgagees thereof. Elaine answered the complaint and alleged that she was the owner of the property and that the Respondents had no right or interest or title to the property. The parents of Calvert alleged that they were the owners and holders of the mortgage executed by Calvert and that the mortgage should be satisfied from the proceeds of the conde mnation award (condemnation being an action where the state gains title to real property by paying to the property owner the fair market value of the property). The fair market value was agreed to be $13,800 and that amount was paid into the court by the People. Then a trial was had to determine the rights of Elaine and the Respondents. The trial court found that the Respondents were owed $6,440 on the promissory note secured by mortgage and that that amount plus interest should be paid to Respondents from the proceeds of the condemnation out of 50% of the funds remaining with the county clerk after certain liens which were legitimately the debt of both Elaine and Calvert were satisfied. The Respondents, as a result, were to receive 50% of the money left after the satisfaction of the liens because the amount due to them was in excess of one-half the balance remaining after the other liens had been paid. The Appellant, Elaine, argued that the execution of the mortgage by Calvert did no t terminate the joint tenancy and sever his interest from Elaine’s, but that the mortgage was a lien against his interest as a joint tenant only, and that when he died, his interest ceased to exist and the lien of the mortgage terminated. That the result would be that Elaine was entitled to the entire award exclusive of the money due to satisfy legitimate liens.
Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*
Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.
*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue
- The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
Topic:
Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.Parties:
Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.Procedural Posture & History:
Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.:
A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises:
Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.
- The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
Brief Facts:
A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.Rule of Law:
Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.Facts:
What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case.Issue(s):
Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.Holding:
Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.Concurring / Dissenting Opinions:
Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.Reasoning and Analysis:
Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.
- The Brief Prologue closes the case brief with important forward-looking discussion and includes:
Policy:
Identifies the Policy if any that has been established by the case.Court Direction:
Shares where the Court went from here for this case.