Deacon v. Bryans
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtCraig, Acting P. J.
Both parties appeal from the judgment rendered. The plaintiff does so claiming that he should have recovered on all four counts contained in the complaint. The defendant insists that the evidence does not warrant any judgment against him. In each count a cause of action is stated upon a promissory note alleged to have been executed by Helene D. Henrich, deceased, and of whose estate Bryans is the executor. Each note is alleged to have been. lost or stolen from the plaintiff, and to have long since been due and payable and unpaid. The principal of the note described in the first count is said…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Kenniff v. CaulfieldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- McClenahan v. KeyesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
- Stuart v. LordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- Kinley v. LargentCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
- Roche v. WareCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- People v. MerkourisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
- People v. GuastiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
- Adams v. HermanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
- Katenkamp v. Union Realty Co.California Court of Appeal · 1940
- Deacon v. BryansCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.