Legal Opinion

Munoz v. Ling

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided January 25, 1939No. 2361Published

1Per curiam

This is an action in assumpsit for the balance alleged to be due for work and labor performed. The plaintiff sued as the assignee of the creditor. Upon the conclusion of plaintiff’s case before the magistrate, an involuntary nonsuit ivas entered upon four grounds, threé of Avhich involved the legality of the assignment, the fourth, payment. Defendant claimed the assignment was void for the reason that it Avas to “John Munoz Agency,” neither a natural nor artificial person having legal entity. Plaintiff appealed to this court upon points of law which present for review the propriety of the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Beilin v. Krenn & Dato, Inc.Illinois Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Johnson v. Cass & EmersonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1917
  3. Steinfeld v. TaylorAppellate Court of Illinois · 1894

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

Powered by the Exa API