Legal Opinion

Quinn v. Dresbach

California Supreme Court

Decided February 20, 1888No. 11684PublishedCited by 29 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Yolo County, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

Hayne, C.

—Action to enjoin a sale by defendants under a deed of trust given to secure the payment of a promissory note. The plaintiff paid the amount of the note to one Treadwell, who appropriated the money to his own use, and the question is, whether Treadwell was the agent of the payee.

Treadwell was not the actual agent of the payee in the matter. It is true that the plaintiff testifies that he was instructed by the payee to pay to Treadwell. But the payee denies this, and in view of the rule in cases of a substantial conflict in the evidence, it must be assumed that there was no actual…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Wilcox v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1877
  2. Flanagan v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
  3. Bank of Stockton v. JonesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Campbell v. GowansUtah Supreme Court · 1909
  2. Catlin v. ReedSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1929
  3. Harrison v. LegoreSupreme Court of Iowa · 1899
  4. Thompson v. MacHadoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
  5. Griswold v. DavisTennessee Supreme Court · 1911

24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API