Legal Opinion

Trenouth v. Farrington

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1880No. 6,305PublishedCited by 11 opinions

Appeal from a judgment and order denying a new trial, in the Fourth District Court, City and County of San Francisco. Morrison, J. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

Department No. 1, Ross, J.:

This is an action upon a judgment. The defense is the Statute of Limitations. The facts are, that on August 26th, 1871, plaintiff commenced suit in the Fourth District Court against the defendant to recover three hundred and eighty dollars, with *274interest and costs. The defendant filed a demurrer in that action, but subsequently withdrew the demurrer, with leave to answer within ten days. lie failed to answer, and on the 20th day of March, 1872, his default was, on motion of plaintiff’s attorney, entered in the cause, and the Court thereupon heard proof on the part…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Gray v. PalmerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
  2. Genella v. RelyeaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
  3. Peck v. CourtisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Crim v. KessingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Feeney v. HinckleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
  3. Edwards v. HellingsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
  4. Rowe v. BlakeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  5. Bashor v. BeloitIdaho Supreme Court · 1911

6 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