Legal Opinion

Tibbet v. Sue

California Supreme Court

Decided August 10, 1899No. L. A. No. 498PublishedCited by 10 opinions

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County and from an order denying a new trial. Lucien Shaw, Judge. The note in suit was dated January 3, 1896,- and the plaintiff and Frank Q. Dock testified that it was then signed by both oi the makers, Tom Sue and Ham Gee, in Dock’s restaurant in Bakersfield, and that five hundred dollars was then counted out and Tom Sue put it in a handkerchief and carried it away.

Read the full summary

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County and from an order denying a new trial. Lucien Shaw, Judge. The note in suit was dated January 3, 1896,- and the plaintiff and Frank Q. Dock testified that it was then signed by both oi the makers, Tom Sue and Ham Gee, in Dock’s restaurant in Bakersfield, and that five hundred dollars was then counted out and Tom Sue put it in a handkerchief and carried it away. Joseph 0. Mefford and Charles Bustillos testified that they came into the restaurant and witnessed the payment of the money, hut did not witness the signing of the…

1Opinion of the Court

COOPER, C.

Action to recover on a promissory note for five hundred dollars and accrued interest. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant Tom Sue appeals from the judgment and from an order denying his motion for a new trial. The appeal comes here on the judgment-roll and a hill of exceptions. Findings were filed by the court below, and it is conceded that the judgment is the legal conclusion from the facts found.

It is claimed that the evidence is insufficient to justify the decision of the court. The argument in appellant’s brief is mainly directed to the improbability of the truth of the testimony…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Harralson v. BarrettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  2. People v. MallonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
  3. People v. YoungCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. In Re Estate of CoverCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Snowball v. SnowballCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
  3. Estate of NeilsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
  4. Spadoni v. MaggentiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  5. Maddux v. MoraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929

5 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