Schultz v. Noble
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Belcher, C. C.
This is an appeal by the plaintiff from a judgment and an order denying him a new trial.
The action was based upon a promissory note, which-was signed by the defendant, indorsed by the plaintiff, and made payable to the order of Boyd & Davis.
The answer denied the material allegations of the complaint, and, by way of affirmative defense, alleged that the note was in fact the note of plaintiff; that it was executed by defendant as apparent maker and plaintiff as apparent indorser, at the request of plaintiff, and was given to defendant that he might negotiate it, and thereby raise…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Howard v. StrattonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
- Livermore v. StineCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
- Treadwell v. HimmelmannCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875
- Sweetland v. ShattuckCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
- Cohen v. GouxCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
3Cited by14 opinions
- Zellner v. WassmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- Clark Equipment Co. v. WheatCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
- Howard v. AdamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
- Durbin v. HillmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
- Silva v. GordoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.