Legal Opinion

Vermont Marble Co. v. Black

California Supreme Court

Decided December 19, 1898No. S. F. No. 1207PublishedCited by 12 opinions

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. Charles W. Slack, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.

Plaintiff brought its action against William Black to recover on four promissory notes executed by the latter. Upon May 31, 1893, judgment by default was given against defendant, and execution was issued and a levy made. William Black died on June 5, 1893, and on July 7, 1893, defendant was duly appointed administratrix of his estate, qualifying upon July 10, 1893. On the fourteenth day of the same month she was substituted as defendant in this action. On July 28, 1893, she moved the court to vacate the default judgment. Upon denial of her motion she appealed, and this court reversed the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. In re Estate of BlytheCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  2. Falkner v. HendyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Kenney v. ParksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  4. In re Estate of PageCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875
  5. Brennan v. BrennanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Reitano v. YankwichCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
  2. Warner Bros. Co. v. FreudCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
  3. Burgess v. California Mutual Building & Loan Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
  4. Patterson v. KeeneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
  5. Haskins v. JordanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898

7 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