Legal Opinion

Benham v. Connor

California Supreme Court

Decided June 5, 1896No. 15898PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of Sán Francisco. John F. Finn, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

Belcher, C.

This action was brought to recover the amount due on three negotiable promissory notes, each of which was separately set out in the complaint, and alleged to have been executed by the defendant, and to have been indorsed by the payee thereof to the plaintiff. The complaint was duly verified. In due time the defendant filed an unverified answer to the complaint, containing a general denial of all its allegations, and setting up as a counterclaim an alleged cause of action against the payee of two of the said notes. Thereafter, the plaintiff served notice on the defendant that on the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Loveland v. GarnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
  2. Felch v. BeaudryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
  3. Hemme v. HaysCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
  4. City & County of San Francisco v. StaudeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. McKenney v. EllsworthCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
  2. St. Mary's Hospital v. PerryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
  3. Boscus v. BohligCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  4. Kafka v. O'MalleySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1946
  5. Evinger v. MoranCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1910

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API