Cook v. Ceas
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sacramento County. Peter J. Shields, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
Hensly and Gardiner were sureties on the bond of Ceas as guardian of the plaintiff, and the action is to recover three thousand dollars, the full penal sum named in the bond, the probate court having determined on settlement of the guardian's final account that he was indebted to his ward in excess of that amount. Ceas and Hensly, although named as defendants, were never served, and Gardiner alone defended the action. His defense was based upon two grounds: 1. That the action was commenced prematurely; and 2. That the action was barred by the special limitation prescribed for actions upon…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Brown v. CampbellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Hunt v. WardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Barnes v. GlideCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Chaquette v. OrtetCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
- Feeney v. HinckleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- Philbrook v. RandallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- Lee v. HensleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
- Bowling v. MerrySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
- Nickals v. StanleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
- Brewer v. PerrymanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1917
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.