Legal Opinion

Beckley v. Archer

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 16, 1925No. Docket No. 2965PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.

The plaintiff brought this action to recover on a promissory note in the sum of $3,000 executed by the defendants in favor of one H. H. Schmitt as in part payment of the purchase price of a certain number of head of cattle. Said note was by said Schmitt, before the filing of the complaint herein, assigned to' the plaintiff. It was stipulated at the trial “that the note was duly made and executed by appellants and delivered to said Schmitt; that no part of the principal or interest had been paid, but that a credit of $175.00 should be allowed upon the note principal as of the date of its…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Phelps v. GradyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
  2. Lee v. McClellandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  3. Monaghan v. Pacific Rolling Mill Co.California Supreme Court · 1889
  4. Feliz v. FelizCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
  5. Ellis v. ToneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Davis v. MonteCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
  2. Springer v. Angeles Credit Co., Ltd.California Court of Appeal · 1941
  3. Mullin v. RousseauCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
  4. Springer v. Angeles Credit Co., Ltd.California Court of Appeal · 1941

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

Powered by the Exa API