Morgan v. Thrift
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Tenth Judicial District for Sutter County. The complaint sets forth, that Thrift with others, on the 11th of June, 1851, sued out a writ of injunction against plaintiffs, and that said Thrift and Fairchild, defendants, executed a bond in the sum of $500, whereby they bound themselves to pay to said plaintiffs, known in said bond as Morgan, John Roe, and Richard Roe, their proper names being unknown, as they allege, to said defendants, such damages as said…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Tenth Judicial District for Sutter County. The complaint sets forth, that Thrift with others, on the 11th of June, 1851, sued out a writ of injunction against plaintiffs, and that said Thrift and Fairchild, defendants, executed a bond in the sum of $500, whereby they bound themselves to pay to said plaintiffs, known in said bond as Morgan, John Roe, and Richard Roe, their proper names being unknown, as they allege, to said defendants, such damages as said plaintiffs should sustain, by reason of said injunction, &c.; that, by the decision of the Court, defendants were rendered…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Heydenfeldt, Justice.
The Practice Act permits a party defendant, whose name is unknown, to be sued by any name. It follows, as a consequence, that where a bond has to be executed by the plaintiff, and is executed to the defendant by a wrong name, the latter has his remedy on such bond, and may describe it as given to him. And in such a case he may show by the record of the suit in which the bond was given, and by extraneous facts, that he was the person intended as the obligee.
In this case the record discloses that the parties were at trial; that the…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Dieckmann v. Superior Court of Los Angeles CountyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1985
- Winick Corp. v. County Sanitation District No. 2California Court of Appeal · 1986
- Hollenbeck-Bush Planing Mill Co. v. AmwegCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- Southwestern Surety Ins. Co. v. DouglasSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1921
- Mazuran v. FinnCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.