Belleau v. Thompson
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, Fifteenth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco. This was an action on a promissory note, by its terms bearing interest, payable monthly until paid, alleged to have been made by the defendants, and delivered to the plaintiff April 22d, 1864, and payable on demand.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court, Fifteenth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco. This was an action on a promissory note, by its terms bearing interest, payable monthly until paid, alleged to have been made by the defendants, and delivered to the plaintiff April 22d, 1864, and payable on demand. The action was commenced April 5th, 1867. To the complaint defendant W. W. Stow answered, by first, denying the material averments of the complaint; second, set up that the note sued on was made by defendant Thompson, and, at the request of Thompson, and for his accommodation solely, he…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Sanderson, J.:
The matter contained in the answer of Stow may constitute a good defence to the action, hut it does not constitute a counter claim upon which he can obtain any relief against the plaintiff. A counter claim is a cause of action in favor of the defendant upon which he might have sued the plaintiff and obtained affirmative relief in a separate action. Had Stow sued the plaintiff in a separate action, upon the facts stated in his answer, what relief could he have obtained ? Nothing short of a cancellation of the note, or his indorsement thereon, would afford him’ any…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Tomales Bay Oyster Corp. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
- Harrison v. McCormickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Roberts v. DonovanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Lyon v. PettyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
- Johnson v. CullinanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.