Simmons v. Hamilton
California Supreme Court
Appeal by defendant Bicknell, from an order granting a new trial, in the Seventeenth District Court. Sepulveda, J.
1Opinion of the Court
McKee, J.:
The Court below found, in substance, that the defendants were jointly indebted to the plaintiff by a promissory note which was then due and payable at the Commercial Bank of Los Angeles; that they verbally agreed with the plaintiff to take up his note in the following manner, viz.: Bicknell engaged to pay one-fourth of the principal and interest due upon the note, and Hamilton to pay the other three-fourths of the note by giving to the plaintiff his individual promissory note, secured by mortgage upon real estate in the city of Los Angeles. This the plaintiff verbally agreed to…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Martin v. MatfieldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
- Goodrich v. StanleySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1856
- Hartman v. OlveraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1876
- Cushing v. WymanSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1857
- Tevis v. HicksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Swift v. Occidental Mining & Petroleum Co.California Supreme Court · 1903
- B. & W. Engineering Co. v. BeamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1913
- In re the Estate of DoyleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Thompson v. GornerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Scheeline v. MoshierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.