Legal Opinion

Neil v. Gane

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 2, 1932No. Docket No. 7268PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

TAPPAAN, J., pro tem.

This appeal is from a judgment had upon a promissory note signed by appellant only. The co-defendant was appellant’s husband, and was made a party solely for that reason.

The complaint in the action was filed on October 15, 1924, and defendants duly answered November 15, 1924. The case came on for trial February 26, 1929, and plaintiff’s counsel made a motion for a continuance, so that he could file an affidavit showing that a deposition had been taken in the action and had disappeared from the files. On February 27, 1929, the affidavit having been filed, the trial was…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Light v. StevensCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Flynn v. FinkCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
  3. Levey v. HendersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
  4. Light v. RichardsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. In Re Marriage of MacFarlane & LangCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
  2. Winkie v. Turlock Irrigation DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
  3. Macfarlane v. LangCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API