Legal Opinion

First National Bank v. Stansbury

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 2, 1931No. Docket No. 7991PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSturtevant, J.

As assignee the plaintiff sued to recover on two promissory notes. The defendant answered and filed a cross-complaint and in that manner brought into the action John Balch, the assignor. The cross-complaint was answered and the trial was had before the court sitting without a jury. The court made findings in favor of the plaintiff and caused a judgment to be entered for a sum amounting to about one-half of the face of the notes. The plaintiff appealed from the judgment and it was reversed and the cause was remanded for the sole purpose of stating the account between Mr. Balch and Mr.…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Field v. AustinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
  2. Lake v. HarrisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
  3. Dauphiny v. BuhneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
  4. Estate of CarpenterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
  5. Ellis v. WitmerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Richfield Oil Corp. v. State Board of EqualizationSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
  2. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  3. Gonzales v. Pacific Greyhound LinesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
  4. Klein v. MaddoxCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
  5. Simmons v. Birge Co.District Court, S.D. California · 1943

3 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