Legal Opinion

Hayashi v. Pacific Fruit Exchange

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 20, 1919No. Civ. No. 2018PublishedCited by 2 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.

Plaintiff brought the action to compel defendant to satisfy and discharge of record a certain crop mortgage given by plaintiff to secure the payment of a loan of two hundred dollars made to him by the defendant and for one hundred dollars damages as provided in section 2941 of the Civil Code. Judgment was in favor of plaintiff as prayed, from which judgment defendant prosecutes this appeal.

The principal question to be determined is as to what construction should be given the crop mortgage, plaintiff’s claim being that it was given merely as security for the repayment of the two hundred…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Tapia v. DemartiniCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  2. Stoughton v. PascoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1825
  3. Brander v. BowmarSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1840
  4. Marvin v. ChambersU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern New York · 1875

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Stub v. BelmontCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Coates v. Maguire Oil & Refining Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1941

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

Powered by the Exa API