McLaughlin v. Clausen
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtWorks, J.
This is an action upon a promissory note for four hundred dollars, dated December 27, 1887, and payable four months after date, with interest from maturity.
The answer admits the making of the note, and that plaintiff is the owner thereof, and that no part of it has been paid, and then, by way of avoidance, alleges that on the day of its date, “the plaintiff and defendant made and entered into the following contract.” A copy of the contract is then set out, and in it twenty persons, the defendant being one of them, are named as parties of the first part, and the plaintiff is named as party of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Front Street, Mission & Ocean Railroad v. ButlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875
3Cited by8 opinions
- Grand Rapids & Indiana R. R. v. HeiselMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
- Promis v. DukeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
- Los Angeles City High School District v. QuinnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- First State Bank v. RadkeNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1924
- McLaughlin v. ClausenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.