Legal Opinion

Meyers v. McKillop

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 3, 1918No. Civ. No. 1799PublishedCited by 8 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.

The action was for the recovery of the sum of $390.25 for services rendered by plaintiff as physician and surgeon and by his assignees, W. B. Johnson and Sacramento Valley Hospital (a corporation), and the judgment was in his favor for $359.25.

The only question in this case is whether the evidence warranted the court in finding that the transaction between plaintiff and defendant created an original or primary obligation on the part of the latter, it being his contention that he was, at most, a guarantor, and that the obligation was void because not in writing. The facts are similar and the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Klamath Lumber Co. v. Co-Operative Land & Trust Co.California Court of Appeal · 1914

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Southern California Enterprises, Inc. v. D. N. & E. Walter & Co.California Court of Appeal · 1947
  2. Bank of America v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
  3. Merz v. PooleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
  4. Williams v. DouganCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  5. Yankelewitch v. BeachCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931

3 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