Legal Opinion

Burrows Shoe Co., Inc. v. Brotherton

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 29, 1930No. Docket No. 7270PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DOOLING, J., pro tem.

In a suit upon a promissory note judgment went for defendant A. A. Irish as administrator of the estate of B. M. Spencer, deceased.

The note was signed as makers by Amelia C. Brotherton, Louis M. Brotherton and the decedent Spencer in favor of Burrows Shoe Co., Rochester, N. Y., as payee. The evidence showed that the Brothertons were engaged in the retail shoe business and were refused credit by plaintiff, a wholesale shoe dealer, unless they would give a promissory note as security with some responsible third person as a co-maker. Accordingly they procured the decedent,…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Rouse v. Wooten.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
  2. Stroud v. ThomasCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
  3. Schoenwetter v. SchoenwetterWisconsin Supreme Court · 1916
  4. First State Bank v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1915
  5. Farmers' State Bank v. ForsstromOregon Supreme Court · 1918

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Wantz v. Union Bank & Trust Co.California Court of Appeal · 1934
  2. Wantz v. Union Bank & Trust Co.California Court of Appeal · 1934

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

Powered by the Exa API