Higgins v. Graham
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kings County. M. L. Short, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
SMITH, C.
This suit was brought on a promissory note, dated July 30, 1896, and due two months after date, for the sum of three hundred and seventy-five dollars. The defendant had judgment, from which and from an order denying his motion for a new trial the plaintiff appeals. The only question involved is as to the statute of limitations, and this turns entirely upon the effect of the pleadings, findings, and judgment. The note is set out in the complaint, and on its face appears to have been executed at Pittsburg, Pennsylvania. The complaint was filed September 5, 1901, more than five years…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Dore v. ThornburghCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Scarborough v. DuganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
- Palmer v. ShawCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- Stout v. CoffinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
- Parke v. WilliamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1857
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- McGuire v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy RailroadSupreme Court of Iowa · 1906
- West v. Broderick & Bascom Rope CompanySupreme Court of Iowa · 1972
- Murnane v. Le MesnagerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
- Loud v. CollinsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1910
- Snyder v. United Properties Co.California Court of Appeal · 1921