Legal Opinion

Enscoe v. Fletcher

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 28, 1905No. 35PublishedCited by 19 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court

1Opinion of the CourtBuckles, J.

This is an action on a claim presented to the administrator of the estate of W. E. McNeil, deceased, which claim was allowed in part and rejected in part,—allowed for $145.92 and rejected for $3,437.50. The claim consisted of the amount due on four promissory notes, which were set forth in full in the claim, with interest thereon, and other items. The disallowance was mainly on the notes. A copy of the claim is contained in the complaint. These notes were all made at the same time, to wit, February 1, 1891, and for one thousand dollars each, and were payable on February 1, 1898, February 1,…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Etchas v. OrenaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
  2. McGrath v. CarrollCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Roberts v. DonovanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
  4. Lichtenberg v. McGlynnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
  5. Morehouse v. MorehouseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Doolittle v. McConnellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
  2. Tabata v. MuraneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Branch v. LambertOregon Supreme Court · 1922
  4. Arp v. BlakeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
  5. Nesbit v. MacDonaldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928

14 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