Chester v. Hill
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the -city and county of San Francisco. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtRoss, J.
The question here. is, whether or not the court below erred in sustaining a demurrer to the third amended complaint, to which only Xarissa Hill and H. W. Woodward were made parties defendant. This complaint charges that on the 18th of December, 1875, one George W. Chester executed to the firm of Toklas, Hahn & Brown, or order, five promissory notes, for the aggregate sum of $2,341.38, bearing interest at the rate of one per cent, per month. That at that time George W. Chester was the owner and holder of two promissory notes, each for the sum of $3,333.33, with interest at one per cent, per…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Revert v. HesseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- White v. StevensonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Chance v. KobstedCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
- Kelly v. MatlockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Pence v. SweeneyIdaho Supreme Court · 1891