Legal Opinion
Pugh v. Dawson
California Court of Appeal
Decided December 15, 1928No. Docket No. 3587PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.
The brief of counsel for the plaintiff contains a correct general statement of the facts of the case and the proceedings at the trial culminating in the rendition of judgment for the plaintiff and we herein adopt said statement, which is as follows:
“The basis of this action is a promissory note for the sum of $2,000.00, made by the defendant, the appellant herein, in favor of R. B. Coleman, dated January 10th, 1924, and due one year after date. The plaintiff, the respondent herein, claims to have acquired the note in due course, before maturity, for a valuable consideration, and without…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Taylor v. TaylorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
- Bedell v. HerringCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- National Bank of Commerce v. KenneyTexas Supreme Court · 1904
- Glenn v. RiceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- Pastene v. PardiniCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Adolph Ramish, Inc. v. WoodruffCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
- Moore v. CraigCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
- Reinert v. ProudCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935