Bank of America v. Universal Finance Co.
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
ARCHBALD, J., pro tem.
Plaintiff brought suit on a cheek issued by defendant upon which the latter had stopped payment. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant has appealed.
There is no serious conflict in the evidence introduced, which substantially shows that Sammis-McBrien Company was a partnership engaged in the business of selling automobiles in San Diego; that appellant, as executor of the last will and testament of Max Jacobs, doing business under the fictitious firm name and style of Universal Finance Company, was engaged in financing the purchase and sale of automobiles in Los…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond v. MalloySupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- National Bank of California v. MinerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
- Old National Bank v. GibsonWashington Supreme Court · 1919
- Luckehe v. First Nat. Bk. of MarysvilleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- Plumas County Bank v. Bank of Rideout, Smith & Co.California Supreme Court · 1913
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Gutierrez v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.District Court, N.D. California · 2010
- Hunt Foods, Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1951
- Bank of Costa Mesa v. LosackCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
- Bank of America Nat. Trust & Savings Ass'n v. Merchandise Nat. Bank of Chicago O'Riley v. Bank of America Nat. Trust & Savings Ass'nCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1953
- Blatz Brewing Co. v. Richardson & Richardson, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1944
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.