Pease v. Taylor
Nevada Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
*289OPINION
By the Court,
Zenoff, C. J.:
Respondent Taylor commenced this action against appellant Pease to recover $16,500, which he claimed was due under the terms of a 90-day promissory note, plus attorney’s fee and costs. The note did not recite any interest rate but did provide that the makers, in case of suit (there were two other makers, but these were not named party defendants in this action), would pay all costs and expenses and such additional sums as the court may adjudge reasonable as an attorney’s fee in said suit or action. The district judge found in favor of Taylor and against Pease…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Stock v. MeekCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
- Devers v. GreenwoodCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
- Taylor v. BuddCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
- Altherr v. Wilshire Mortgage CorporationArizona Supreme Court · 1968
- Bochicchio v. PetrocelliSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1940
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Carper v. Kanawha Banking & Trust Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1974
- Mosebach v. BlytheCourt of Appeals of Iowa · 1979
- Ferdie Sievers, Etc. v. Diversified Mortg.Nevada Supreme Court · 1979
- Security Escrow Corp. v. State of Taxation & Revenue DepartmentNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1988
- Bates v. ChronisterNevada Supreme Court · 1984
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.