Hodgkins v. Wright
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County and from an order denying a new trial. Walter Van Dyke, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtTemple, J.
The action is for money laid out and expended for the benefit of defendant and at his request. The complaint contains two counts. The first is for three thousand and eight dollars and sixty-eight cents paid to the Farmers’ and Merchants’ Bank September 20, 1894, for the use of defendant. The second cause of action is for money paid by defendant to the First National Bank of Los Angeles for the use of plaintiff, between the first day of December, 1893, and the first day of July, 1894.
Several defenses were interposed, upon all of which there was much controversy, but I do not find it necessary…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Sacramento Bank v. AlcornCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
3Cited by17 opinions
- Bank of Italy National Trust & Savings Ass'n v. BentleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
- Beeler v. American Trust Co.California Supreme Court · 1944
- Weber v. McClevertyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
- Chapman v. HicksCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
- Conlin v. CoyneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.