MILLER v. HART (1937)

District Court of Appeal, Third District, California.

MILLER v. HART et al.†

Civ. 5783.

Decided: April 13, 1937

Byron J. Walters, of Los Angeles, for appellants. V. A. Morgan, of Alhambra, for respondent.

This is an appeal from that portion of a decree of foreclosure of a trust deed ordering a deficiency judgment against these defendants after the sale of the property described in the deed of trust.

Appellants maintain that the trial court erred in ordering such deficiency judgment without the appointment of an appraiser in accordance with section 726 of the Code of Civil Procedure (as amended by St. 1933, p. 2118), in an action to foreclose a deed of trust made prior to the effective date of that section.

In Wilson v. Superior Court, 8 Cal.App. (2d) 14, 47 P.(2d) 331, the court there passed upon this question, and there held that as to a note and deed of trust made prior to the passage of sections 725a and 726 of the Code of Civil Procedure as it now exists (St.1933, pp. 1673, 2118) requiring the appointment of an appraiser, at least so far as it affects the right of a deficiency judgment, is unconstitutional.

Upon the authority of that case, the judgment from which this appeal is taken is affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network