Lindemann v. Coryell
California Court of Appeal
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtTyler, P. J.
This action was brought to recover upon a certain promissory note executed by defendant in favor of the American Dredging Company for the sum of $18,235.21. The note was assigned to plaintiff after maturity. Judgment was recovered for the full amount prayed for, and this is an appeal from such judgment.
Defendant, by his pleading, admits the execution of the note, but as an affirmative defense he sets up certain facts which he claims estops the plaintiff from maintaining the action.
In substance, his answer alleges that prior to the execution of the note and in the year 1915, defendant desired…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Harding v. RobinsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- Gandy v. WeckerlySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
- Rottman v. HevenerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
3Cited by20 opinions
- Riverisland Cold Storage, Inc. v. Fresno-Madera Production Credit Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 2013
- Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n v. PendergrassCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
- Cobbs v. CobbsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
- Richardson v. LampCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
- Oakland Medical Building Corp. v. AureguyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.