Legal Opinion
Anaheim National Bank v. Dolph
California Supreme Court
Decided April 6, 1927No. Docket No. L.A. 8517PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtShenk, J.
On the judgment-roll alone the defendant appeals from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff for $5,000 and interest on a promissory note. The complaint sets forth a copy of the note which is as follows:
“$5,000.00 Capistrano, California, Dec. 22, 1922.
“Six months after date, for value received, I promise to pay to the order of myself Five Thousand & No/100 Dollars payable at Any hank in Santa Ana,- California, with interest at eight per cent, per annum from date until maturity.
“And if interest or principal is not paid when due, then accrued interest and principal are to draw interest at the…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- National Bank of Commerce v. KenneyTexas Supreme Court · 1904
- City National Bank v. Goodloe-McClelland Commission Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1902
- Farmer v. Bank of GraettingerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1906
- Glidden v. HenryIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
- Stitzel v. MillerIllinois Supreme Court · 1911
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Philadelphia National Bank v. BuchmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
- First National Bank of Olive v. DolphCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
- Golden State Bank v. DolphCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
- Beluca Ventures LLC v. Einride AktiebolagDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2022
- Doe 1 v. National Collegiate Athletic AssociationDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2023
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.