Legal Opinion
Bongiovanni v. Fickett
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 13, 1932No. Docket No. 8226PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BURROUGHS, J., pro tem.
This is an action to recover overdue installments of principal, together with interest and an attorney fee, under the terms of a promissory note. The court awarded plaintiff a judgment in the sum of $1262.66, but deducted therefrom a counterclaim in favor of the defendant in the sum of $1129.38, and entered judgment in favor of plaintiff in the sum of $133.28. From the judgment the plaintiff has appealed.
The main issue involved is whether the consideration for which the promissory note was given was a part of the purchase price of certain personal property under and by…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Hicks v. ChristesonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- Ludy v. ZumwaltCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
- Mushet v. Department of Public ServiceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1917
- Meadow Valley Land Co. v. ManerudOregon Supreme Court · 1916
3Cited by5 opinions
- Pioneer Constructors v. SymesArizona Supreme Court · 1954
- Glen Alden Corp. v. DuvallCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1965
- Planning Partners International, LLC v. QED, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2013
- Independent Iron Works, Inc. v. County of TulareCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
- Budget Way Cleaners and Laundry, Inc. v. SimonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957