Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Downing v. Donegan

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 7, 1905No. 73Published

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1ConcurrenceGray, P. J.

I concur in the judgment for ' the following reasons:—

The due execution of the note in suit, and its assignment to plaintiff, and that the latter is the “owner and holder” thereof, is admitted by the defendants’ failure to deny the same. Inasmuch as the execution of the note and ownership in plaintiff were admitted by the pleadings, if the case had been submitted without any evidence the plaintiff would have been entitled to a judgment for the principal and interest of his note. The burden was on defendants to prove their affirmative defense as to the trust fund. It was also on them to prove…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Winslow v. GohransenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Melone v. RuffinoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
  3. Woodham v. AllenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
  4. Estate of CarpenterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
  5. Woodham v. ClineCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900

3 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