Coghlin v. May
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Twelfth District. Suit against defendant as sole trader upon two notes in usual form, executed by her to the order of Kendrick & Smith, the one for four hundred dollars, with two and one-half per cent, interest, dated June 2d, and the other for one hundred and fifty dollars, and like interest, dated June 26th, 1858, and payable on demand.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Twelfth District. Suit against defendant as sole trader upon two notes in usual form, executed by her to the order of Kendrick & Smith, the one for four hundred dollars, with two and one-half per cent, interest, dated June 2d, and the other for one hundred and fifty dollars, and like interest, dated June 26th, 1858, and payable on demand. The complaint contained the ordinary averments in suit by a holder upon a note indorsed and delivered by the payor to plaintiff. The answer first denies generally the allegations of the complaint; and second, avers that plaintiff is not the…
1Opinion of the CourtBaldwin, J.
Cope, J. concurring.
We understand from the evidence of the witness Kendrick— which proof seems to be uncontradicted—that the note was not given by Mrs. May as evidence of indebtedness by her, or with the understanding that it was to be held or enforced against her ; but that it was given only to be used as collateral security by Kendrick & Co., for the purpose of their raising money or getting credit on it. It seems they did use it for this purpose, and after-wards took it up from the pledgees. This being so, it had answered its purpose, and Kendrick & Co. having only got it to use in this…
2Cited by9 opinions
- First National Bank v. ReedCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
- Wood v. KennedyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
- State Savings Bank of Logan v. OsbornSupreme Court of Iowa · 1920
- McPherson v. WestonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Wilhoit v. SeavallSupreme Court of Kansas · 1926
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.