Legal Opinion

First National Bank of Dixon v. Spangler

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 30, 1920No. Civ. No. 2145PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.

The action is on three promissory notes, for two thousand dollars, one thousand dollars, and five hundred dollars respectively—all executed by defendant N. R. Spangler. The theory of the plaintiff is that at the time of the execution of the notes the two defendants were co-partners engaged in the butcher business and that said notes represented the obligation of the firm although signed only by N. R. Spangler. The court found this theory to be true as to the two notes aggregating three thousand dollars but that the five hundred dollar note represents the sole obligation of N. R. Spangler, and…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Mills v. RiggleSupreme Court of Kansas · 1911
  2. Baker & Hamilton v. LambertCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1907
  3. Miller v. McCordCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1913

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Davis v. MorrisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
  2. Smith v. Stock Yards Loan Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1939
  3. Jacobson v. LambCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
  4. Wurm v. MetzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
  5. Amunategui v. Spokane Cattle Loan Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1923

3 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