Legal Opinion

Bogart v. George K. Porter Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided February 15, 1924No. S. F. No. 10154PublishedCited by 52 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMyers, J.

Defendants appeal from a judgment in favor of plaintiff in an action upon a promissory note. The sole contention urged by them upon this appeal is that the cause of action was barred by the statute of limitations.

After the former decision of this case a rehearing was applied for by the respondent upon the ground that we had failed to consider one of the points made by her upon the oral argument and that we had, in effect, overruled the case of More v. Hutchinson, 187 Cal. 623 [203 Pac. 97]. The rehearing was granted in order that we might give further consideration to the point stressed upon…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Silver King Coalition Mines Co. of Nevada v. Silver King Consol. Mining Co. of UtahCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1913
  2. Hunt v. WardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  3. Thomas v. Pacific Beach Co.California Supreme Court · 1896
  4. Key West Wharf & Coal Co. v. PorterSupreme Court of Florida · 1912
  5. Williams v. NaftzgerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894

27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by52 opinions

  1. Lien Huynh v. Chase Manhattan BankCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
  2. Maguire v. Hibernia Savings & Loan SocietyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Heyer v. FlaigCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
  4. Barrera v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
  5. Moss v. MossCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942

47 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