Legal Opinion
Goldberg, Bowen & Co. v. Dimick
California Supreme Court
Decided February 8, 1915No. S.F. No. 6381PublishedCited by 10 opinions
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMelvin, J.
Defendant has appealed from a judgment for the aggregate sum of $3,394.08 with interest.
The action was based upon three promissory notes each pleaded in a separate count. Each note is fully set forth in the complaint. Each, as pleaded, is made payable to “Goldberg, Bowen & Co., Inc.,” and purports to be signed by J. K. Dimick as principal and H. H. Blood as surety. Each count contains the allegation that Goldberg, Bowen & Go. was at all times mentioned therein a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the state of California. It is also averred in the complaint that each…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Medway Cotton Manufactory v. AdamsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1813
- Charitable Ass'n in Middle Parish v. BaldwinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1840
- President of the Commercial Bank v. FrenchMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1839
- City of Lowell v. MorseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1840
3Cited by10 opinions
- Irvin v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1967
- Indian Ref. Co., Inc. v. Royal Oil Co., Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1929
- Haynes v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1972
- Andrews v. SpencerOregon Supreme Court · 1951
- Gelber v. CappellerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.