Ward v. Clay
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Mendocino County, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Vanclief, C.
Action upon a promissory note for $2,546.48, on which plaintiff recovered a balance unpaid of $790.75 and costs. The appeals are from an order denying defendant’s motion for new trial, and from the final judgment.
The complaint states:—
“1. That on or about the seventh day of December, 1883, the defendant, Mrs. Sadie I. Clay, and her husband, Frederic Clay (since deceased), were indebted to the said plaintiff, John T. Ward, in the sum of twenty-five hundred and forty-six and forty-eight hundredths dollars ($2,546.48), and on said seventh day of December, 1883, in consideration of…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Lambert v. HaskellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Loup v. California Southern RailroadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
- Roland v. KreyenhagenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1861
- Mayor of Los Angeles v. SignoretCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875
- Reynolds v. HosmerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1873
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by39 opinions
- Stonesifer v. KilburnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Silvers v. GrossmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- People ex rel. Stead v. Spring Lake Drainage & Levee DistrictIllinois Supreme Court · 1912
- Robinson v. Exempt Fire Co.California Supreme Court · 1894
- Los Angeles City School District v. Landier Investment Co.California Court of Appeal · 1960
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.