Rauer's Law & Collection Co. v. Harrell
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tulare County. J. A. Allen, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtChipman, P. J.
Plaintiff brought the action to recover judgment on two promissory notes. In the first cause of action it is alleged" that defendant made and executed his promissory note for the sum of thirty-four thousand dollars at the city and county of San Francisco, dated September 22, 1913, payable on January 2, 1914, to the order of the maker at the Savings Bank & Trust Company of San Francisco; that at said time -and place defendant indorsed said note and delivered the same to the Pacific Coast Salt Company; that thereafter and prior to the commencement of this action and after the maturity of said…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Dingley v. OlerSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Smoot's CaseSupreme Court of the United States · 1873
- Bell v. Bank of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
- Hitchcock v. RooneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
- Ruth v. KroneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1909
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Hayes v. City of WilmingtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
- Kimel v. Missouri State Life Ins. Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1934
- Guerrieri v. SeveriniCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
- Georgia Railway & Power Co. v. ShawCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1929
- California Canning Peach Growers v. HarrisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.