Legal Opinion

McCormick v. Brown

California Supreme Court

Decided October 15, 1868PublishedCited by 62 opinions

‘ Appeal from the District Court, Eleventh Judicial District, El Dorado County. The following are the material portions of the defendant’s letter of the 4th of August, 1863: “Placerville, August 4th, 1863. “Cart. J. L. McCormick, Peru, Illinois—Sir: I can now make your offer good. I have, hy a little streak, made a small raise over expenses. I will say just what I can do.

Read the full summary

‘ Appeal from the District Court, Eleventh Judicial District, El Dorado County. The following are the material portions of the defendant’s letter of the 4th of August, 1863: “Placerville, August 4th, 1863. “Cart. J. L. McCormick, Peru, Illinois—Sir: I can now make your offer good. I have, hy a little streak, made a small raise over expenses. I will say just what I can do. I can pay you three hundred and fifty dollars at any time now, and three hundred and fifty dollars in one year from the time I do the first, and four hundred dollars in two years from the date of first payment, in American…

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court, Rhodes, J. :

The plaintiff alleges that in 1852 he recovered a judgment against the defendant in the Circuit Court for the County of La Salle, State of Illinois, for one thousand one hundred and fifty-five dollars and fifty cents; and that, in consideration thereof, the defendant, on the 4th of August, 1863, promised, in writing, to pay the whole of said judgment in gold coin. The action was commenced in June, 1866. The Court found that the defendant, on the 4th of August, 1863, in writing, acknowledged the debt to be due to the plaintiff, and at the same time and in like manner…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Bell v. MorrisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1828
  2. Sands v. GelstonNew York Supreme Court · 1818
  3. Jones v. MooreSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1813
  4. De Forest v. HuntSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1830
  5. Berghaus v. CalhounSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1837

3Cited by62 opinions

  1. Feeney v. HowardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Southern Pacific Co. v. ProsserCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  3. Alhambra Addition Water Co. v. RichardsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
  4. In Re: Salvatore James Marino and Dolores Carmen Marino, Debtors, Classic Auto Refinishing, Inc. v. Salvatore James MarinoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
  5. Rodgers v. ByersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900

57 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