Tyson v. Reinecke
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco and from an order denying a new trial, and from an order refusing to dissolve an attachment. James M. Troutt, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtRichards, J.
This is an action on a guaranty. The appeal is by defendant from a judgment and from an order denying him a new trial. Defendant also appeals from an order refusing to dissolve an attachment.
Plaintiffs are assignees of Gage, Mills & Co., a partnership, and the action is brought for the reasonable value and the alleged contract price of lumber alleged to have been sold and delivered by said partnership to the Metropolis Construction Company, a corporation, and is founded upon a written instrument of guaranty signed by defendant in the words and figures as follows:
“San Francisco, Cal., Dec.…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Hathaway v. DavisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
- Finch v. McVeanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1907
- Daneri v. GazzolaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- Jenne v. BurgerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- McKee v. Monterey CountyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1876
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Riverside & Dan River Cotton Mills, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1930
- Mahana v. AlexanderCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
- Hammond Lumber Co. v. Richardson Bldg. & Eng'g Co.California Supreme Court · 1930
- Earl Fruit Co. v. HermanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
- Murillo v. TooleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.