Wood v. Brush
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county Of San Francisco. In his supplemental answer, the defendant alleged the existence of a partnership between himself, the plaintiff, the plaintiff’s assignor, and several other persons, and that since the commencement of the action and the filing of the original answer he had advanced a certain sum of money in connection with the partnership business ' for the account of the plaintiff and his assignor..
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county Of San Francisco. In his supplemental answer, the defendant alleged the existence of a partnership between himself, the plaintiff, the plaintiff’s assignor, and several other persons, and that since the commencement of the action and the filing of the original answer he had advanced a certain sum of money in connection with the partnership business ' for the account of the plaintiff and his assignor.. The amount so advanced was pleaded as a counterclaim. The further facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Searls, C.
This is an action upon a promissory notei for $875 and interest, made by defendant, payable to the- • order of W. W. Potter, and indorsed by the latter to the.plaintiff.
The sworn complaint contained a copy of the note, and is in the usual form
The answer is as follows:—
“ Now conies the defendant above named, and, answering the plaintiff’s complaint herein, avers that as consideration for the promissory note declared on in plaintiff’s complaint herein he received the sum of six hundred and nine and seventy-nine one hundredths dollars ($609.79), and no more. Wherefore he prays,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Gannon v. DoughertyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
3Cited by9 opinions
- Cuneo v. LawsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
- Segerstrom v. ScottCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1911
- Rauer's Law & Collection Co. v. Sheridan Proctor Co.California Court of Appeal · 1919
- McPherson v. WestonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Clark v. KingNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1891
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.