Legal Opinion

Egilbert v. Hall

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 18, 1941No. Civ. 6490PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTuttle, J.

Plaintiff brought this action to recover upon a promissory note, executed by defendants, and reading as follows:

“Know All Men By These Presents

That we, the undersigned, Ruby J. Codding, Ida Jewell D ’Egilbert, George Jewell, and Grace B. Hood, owners or parties in interest of the Hood ranch and personal properties in Batchelor Valley, Lake County, California, are legally indebted to William D ’Egilbert of San Juan, Puerto Rico, inAhe sum of two thousand, one hundred and forty-six dollars and 35/100 cents for loans or advances made in the interest of the preservation of the said property, as…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Light v. StevensCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Weaver v. GrunbaumCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
  3. Bank of Italy National Trust & Savings Ass'n v. BettencourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Clyne v. BrockCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
  2. Garthofner v. EdmondsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
  3. Cohen v. KaufmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
  4. Greene v. FickertCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  5. Johnson v. McArthurSupreme Court of Kansas · 1979

1 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