Case Name: EMMA ROSE et al., Respondents, v. HENRY CONLIN, Appellant
Court: District Court of Appeal of the State of California
Jurisdiction: California
Decision Date: 1921-04-13
Citations: 52 Cal. App. 796
Docket Number: Civ. No. 3558
Parties: EMMA ROSE et al., Respondents, v. HENRY CONLIN, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: California Appellate Reports
Volume: 52
Pages: 796–796

Head Matter:
[Civ. No. 3558.
First Appellate District, Division One.
April 13, 1921.]
EMMA ROSE et al., Respondents, v. HENRY CONLIN, Appellant.
Mortgage —■ Foreclosure —• Satisfaction of Deficiency.—Judgment affirmed upon the authority of Hose et al. v. Gonlin, ante, p. 225, [198 Pac. 653],
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Mateo County. Geo. H. Buck, Judge.
Affirmed.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court in Bose et al. v. Gonlin, ante, p. 225, [198 Pac. 653].
Charles W. Cobb, Henry Conlin and Edgar C. Chapman for Appellant.
Garret W. McEnerney for Respondents.

Opinion:
THE COURT.
Upon the authority of Rose v. Conlin (No. 3760), ante, p. 225, [198 Pac. 653], this day decided by this court, the order is affirmed.
A petition to have the cause heard in the supreme court, after judgment in the district court of appeal, was denied by the supreme court on June 9, 1921.
All the Justices concurred.