Montgomery v. Rauer
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco and from an order denying a new trial. William B. Daingerfield, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHehshaw, J.
Plaintiffs, who are minors, sued defendant by an action in form for moneys had and received. Defendant answered, alleging that “the above-named minors have received all of the moneys deposited by their said guardian, Agnes S. Montgomery, with this defendant.” He followed this averment by a denial that the sum of four thousand dollars demanded in the complaint, or any other sum of money, was due, owing, and unpaid from him to the plaintiffs. The action was tried before a jury, which returned a verdict against him in the sum of fifteen hundred dollars. From the judgment and from the order…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Hayes v. Massachusetts Mutual Life InsuranceIllinois Supreme Court · 1888
- Culp v. . LeeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
- Lunday v. ThomasSupreme Court of Georgia · 1858
- Torry v. . BlackNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Wallace v. BrownIndiana Supreme Court · 1872
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Gaver v. EarlyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
- Petersen v. LydersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
- Martin v. Postal Union Life InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
- Biurrun v. ElizaldeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923