Prescott v. Grady
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Temple, C.
This action is brought upon a promissory note executed by defendant. Judgment was entered against him on the pleadings, and it recites that the defendant was duly and regularly served with notice of the time and place of hearing the motion.
There is inserted in the transcript, however, what purports to be a notice of the hearing of the motion May 30, 1890, a legal holiday. The judgment recites that the motion was heard June 20, 1890. There is no bill of exceptions, and we cannot conclude that the notice, inserted without authority in the transcript, is the notice in pursuance of…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Bullock v. TaylorMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
- Patterson v. DonnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
- Bank of Woodland v. TreadwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
- Monroe v. FohlCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Adams v. SeamanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Coast Bank v. HolmesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971
- Genis v. KrasneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
- Brooks v. ForingtonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Johnson v. Hayes Cal Builders, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1963
- Alexander v. McDowCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.