Legal Opinion

Sparks v. Richardson

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 3, 1956No. Civ. 5332PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMussell, J.

This is an action on a promissory note. Defendant in his answer admits that he signed the note but alleges that it was not supported by a good and valid consideration and did not reflect the true agreement of the parties. He admits having paid $2,250 on the note and, as an affirmative defense, alleges that in signing it he mistakenly believed that it contained only the provisions set forth in a memorandum which he delivered to the Blackstone Realty Company. He asks that the note be reformed by striking therefrom the acceleration clause and the agreement to pay attorney’s fees. He further…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. McAllister v. DrapeauCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Wilson v. StearnsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
  3. L.A. & Redondo R.R. v. New Liverpool Salt Co.California Supreme Court · 1906
  4. Wilson v. MatteiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
  5. Wayman Investment Co. v. WessingerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1910

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Ryan v. Mike-Ron Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1964
  2. Cal-Neva Lodge, Inc. v. MarxCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API