Legal Opinion

Morrill v. Nightingale

California Supreme Court

Decided February 20, 1892No. 14572PublishedCited by 40 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtGaroutte, J.

This is an action in equity to foreclose a contract and recover judgment upon four promissory notes amounting in the aggregate to forty-three thousand dollars. The contract and notes were made by defendant Nightingale to the plaintiffs on account of an alleged purchase of the capital stock of the Milwaukee Furniture Company. The prayer of the complaint asks that judgment be had for the amount of the notes, and that certain real estate and the said capital stock be applied to the satisfaction of such judgment, said property having been transferred under the contract to secure the payment of…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Taylor v. JaquesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1871

3Cited by40 opinions

  1. Gantt v. Sentry InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Berka v. WoodwardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  3. Stockton Plumbing & Supply Co. v. WheelerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
  4. Hugh Wendell MacDonald v. James A. MusickCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1970
  5. People v. BeggsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918

35 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