Legal Opinion

Montgomery v. Riess

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 29, 1959No. Civ. No. 24022Published

1Opinion of the CourtFourt, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff in an action involving a non-negotiable promissory note.

The complaint filed on May 17, 1956, sought recovery on a promissory note. A copy of said note is set forth in a footnote hereto.* 1 The due execution and delivery of the note to and ownership in the plaintiff was alleged. It was also alleged that no part of the same had been paid and that no agreement of *713purchase of the lands and water rights referred to in the note had been executed and that the entire amount was due and owing.

The defendants answered and admitted the execution…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Bull v. CoeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  2. Lifton v. HarshmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
  3. Pinsky v. SloatCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
  4. Oakland Medical Building Corp. v. AureguyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
  5. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n v. GoldsteinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938

8 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