Hays v. Plummer
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County and from orders denying a new trial, and denying a motion to vacate the judgment for defendants, and to enter a judgment for the plaintiff. Walter Van Dyke, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcFARLAND, J.
—Action upon a note and mortgage made and executed August 5, 1896, by the defendants Eugene R. Plummer and his wife, Maria A. Plummer, to the defendant John P. McCormick, and assigned hy him August 14, 1896, to plaintiff. Judgment was rendered in favor of the Plummers, and from this judgment and from an order denying a new trial, and also from an order denying plaintiff’s motion to vacate the judgment and to enter a judgment for plaintiff under section 663 of the Code of Civil Procedure, plaintiff appeals.
On the said fifth day of August, 1896, the defendant Eugene R. Plummer entered into a…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Franklin v. TwogoodSupreme Court of Iowa · 1865
3Cited by7 opinions
- Miller & Lux Inc. v. Enter. Canal & Land Co.California Supreme Court · 1915
- National Hardware Co. v. SherwoodCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
- McKenney v. EllsworthCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
- First National Bank v. HenryIndiana Supreme Court · 1900
- Pribus v. BushCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1981
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.