Bramante v. Krug
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
AGEE, J. pro tem.*
This is an appeal by plaintiff from a judgment in favor of defendant Krug. Judgment against defendant Hutchins was entered by default and he is not a party to this appeal.
Between July, 1949, and March, 1950, plaintiff loaned to defendant Hutchins a total sum of $27,000. Defendant Krug had also advanced substantial amounts of money to Hutchins. Around April 1, 1950, Krug made and delivered to Hutchins his check in the sum of $6,500, postdated April 3, 1950. This cheek was issued and delivered subject to a condition precedent. This condition was never fulfilled and *772Krug has a…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Merchs. Nat'l Bank of Santa Monica v. BentelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
- Oppenheimer v. Radke & Co.California Court of Appeal · 1912
- Pacific Acceptance Corp. v. GoodmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
- Bank of Italy v. Welbilt Auto Body Co.California Court of Appeal · 1929
- Peaples Finance & Thift Co. v. Matthews Fruit Co.California Court of Appeal · 1930
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Roth v. Guardian Thrift & LoanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958