Legal Opinion

Bartlett Estate Co. v. Fraser

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 27, 1909No. Civ. No. 665PublishedCited by 21 opinions

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, and from an order denying a new trial. E. S. Torrance,- Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtAllen, P. J.

Appeal by defendant Fraser from a judgment and from an order denying a new trial.

Plaintiff filed a verified complaint alleging its due organization and existence as a California corporation, setting out in kaec verba a non-negotiable promissory note, joint in form, payable to the People’s State Bank, and signed by defendants Fraser and Wyneken, alleging that no part had been paid except interest for one year, and the assignment and transfer of the note to plaintiff. Defendant Wyneken made default. Fraser answered, averring that he had not sufficient information and belief upon the subject to…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Mulcahy v. BuckleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  2. Roberts v. DonovanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
  3. Doll v. GoodCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
  4. Farmers' Exchange Bank v. MorseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Estate of GleasonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
  2. Estate of TrefrenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
  3. Pettengill v. BlackmanIdaho Supreme Court · 1917
  4. Rogers Brothers Co. v. BeckCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
  5. Art Metal Constr. Co. v. A. F. Anderson Co.California Supreme Court · 1920

16 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