Pastene v. Pardini
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.
This was an action upon a promissory note. The complaint contained the usual averments. It charged that Luigi Pardini, “for a valuable consideration, made, executed, and delivered to plaintiff a promissory note,” etc. It also averred non-payment of the principal sum and interest, and that the whole was due and unpaid. The answer was a denial that “Luigi Pardini, for a valuable consideration or otherwise, made, executed, and delivered to plaintiff, or made or executed or delivered to plaintiff, a promissory note for the sum of twenty-five hundred dollars, or any other sum.” The next denial of…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Melone v. RuffinoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- De Baker v. Southern California RailwayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Le Mesnager v. HamiltonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Indianapolis Piano Manufacturing Co. v. CavenIndiana Supreme Court · 1876
- Bell v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- Caminetti v. Pacific Mutual Life InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
- Everts v. MattesonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Foster v. KeatingCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
- People v. DiazCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
- Estate of HormanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.