Legal Opinion

Dyer v. Sebrell

California Supreme Court

Decided February 25, 1902No. L.A. No. 972PublishedCited by 10 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.

This action was founded on two promissory notes made by defendant to his own order, indorsed by him to the Riverside Banking Company, and upon the same day indorsed by the bank to the respondent, who was its cashier. No question arises over the making or indorsing of the notes by appellant, nor over the pleaded fact of nonpayment, but defendant, by way of counterclaim, urged as offset certain certificates of deposit of the Riverside Banking Company, which had been assigned to him before the commencement of the action for a valuable consideration. In this connection appellant insists that the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Giselman v. StarrCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
  2. City Bank of New Haven v. . PerkinsNew York Court of Appeals · 1864
  3. Ellicott v. Martin, Love & Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1854
  4. Crane v. Pacific BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
  5. Haugan v. SunwallSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1895

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Greene v. McAuleySupreme Court of Kansas · 1905
  2. National Bank of San Mateo v. WhitneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
  3. Carver v. San Joaquin Cigar Co.California Court of Appeal · 1911
  4. Ramboz v. StansburyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1910
  5. Miller v. WilliamsonWashington Supreme Court · 1924

5 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