Legal Opinion

Vance v. Gilbert

California Supreme Court

Decided July 30, 1918No. L. A. No. 4556. Department OnePublishedCited by 11 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.

The above-named appellants appeal from the judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, from an order denying their motion for a new trial, and from an order denying their motion to retax costs.

The complaint states a cause of action upon a promissory note dated October 26, 1910, for seven hundred dollars executed by the above-named appellants, payable to said Halladay Motor Car Company, four months after date, and to foreclose an alleged equitable mortgage upon a tract of land, for the security of said note. It is alleged that the note was indorsed by the Halladay Motor Car Company to the plaintiffs…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Duncan v. RamishCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  2. People v. GlazeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
  3. People v. Woon Tuck WoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  4. Downing v. Le DuCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  5. Gavin v. GavinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Fawkes v. ReynoldsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Coppola v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1989
  3. Proctor v. ArakelianCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
  4. Cassetta v. BaimaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
  5. Bryant v. WellbanksCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API