Legal Opinion

Lepori v. Hilson

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 1, 1930No. Docket No. 7282PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSturtevant, J.

This action was brought to recover on a demand promissory note. The complainant pleaded in the ordinary form his cause of action. The defendant admitted the making of the note but denied all liability thereon and alleged that he executed the note as an accommodation to the plaintiff and on the promise that the plaintiff would hold the defendant harmless thereon and that there was no consideration for the note. The trial court made findings in favor of the defendant. The plaintiff has appealed and has brought up typewritten transcripts.

On November 15,- 1923, the date the note was executed, C.…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Williams v. HasshagenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
  2. First National Bank v. ReedCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
  3. Wilhoit v. SeavallSupreme Court of Kansas · 1926
  4. Pacific-Southwest Trust & Savings Bank v. Valley Finance Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1929
  5. Franklin Bank v. St. Louis Car Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1928

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Bank of America v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
  2. Darden v. HarrisonTexas Supreme Court · 1974
  3. Susan Engeleiter, Administrator, Small Business Administration v. Young Kyun ShinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
  4. Darden v. HarrisonTexas Supreme Court · 1974
  5. Darden v. HarrisonTexas Supreme Court · 1974

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

Powered by the Exa API