Legal Opinion

Cowgill v. Dinwiddie

California Supreme Court

Decided June 8, 1893No. 15161PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sonoma County, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

Searls, C.

Appeal from a judgment in favor of plaintiff, and from an order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial. The action was brought to recover one thousand dollars upon an instrument in writing executed by Thomas Rochford, deceased, on the third day of December, 1886, to be paid by his executors after his death to the plaintiff, provided said sum is not left for her use in his last will. The demand was presented to-the executors January 16,1891, and as plaintiff avers rejected on the seventh day of February, 1891. Suit was brought within three months thereafter. The answer denies…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Bollinger v. ManningCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Roddan v. DoaneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  3. Steward v. HinkelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Mix v. YoakumCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  2. Geneva Towers Ltd. Partnership v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
  3. Hinkel v. CrowsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
  4. Barclay v. BlackintonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  5. Gregory v. J. P. Clabrough's ExecutorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900

4 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