Helfrich v. Romer
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco denying a new trial. John Hunt, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHall, J.
This is an appeal from an order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial.
The action is one upon two promissory notes, one for $1,000 and the other for $92, alleged to have been executed by defendant to G. P. Helfrich, husband of plaintiff, as her agent, and in consideration of money, alleged to be the separate property of plaintiff, loaned to defendant. It is also alleged that said G. P. Helfrich, after the execution of said notes, indorsed and. delivered them to plaintiff, and that no part of either has been paid, save $20 as interest.
Defendant in his answer denied that said notes were…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Brison v. BrisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Ayres v. BensleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
- Coubrough v. AdamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Petaluma Paving Co. v. SingleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
- Pierce v. WillisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
3Cited by2 opinions
- Cobe v. CraneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- Ex Parte TeagueSupreme Court of Alabama · 1940