Montgomery v. Dorn
California Court of Appeal
APPB'AL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Alameda County and from an order refusing a new trial. N. D. Arnot, Judge presiding. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtChipman, P. J.
In plaintiff’s amended complaint it is alleged that defendant Fitch executed his promissory note to plaintiff, September 26, 1908, for the sum of one thousand three hundred and sixty dollars, payable ninety days after date, with interest after maturity, secured by certain shares of Home Circle Cash Store & Mail Order House, a corporation; that, after the execution of said promissory note and prior to the commencement of the action, defendants Dorn and Rankin ‘ ‘ expressly and in writing undertook, agreed and promised the said Chas. A. Fitch, for a good and valuable consideration moving to…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Melone v. RuffinoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Williams v. NaftzgerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Stuart v. LordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- Chung Kee v. DavidsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Bacon v. DavisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1908
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Hartman Ranch Co. v. Associated Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1937
- Northstar Financial Advisors Inc. v. Schwab InvestmentsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2015
- Coughlin v. BlairCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
- Sokolow v. City of HopeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
- McDevitt v. Chas. Corriea & Bros.California Court of Appeal · 1924
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.