Lucas v. Pico
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment for the plaintiff, and from an order denying a new trial, in the Seventeenth District Court, County of Los Angeles. Sepulveda, J. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
McKee, J.:
On the trial of this case, the defendant in the Court below objected to the offer of the promissory note in evidence, because *127it appeared- from the testimony that the consideration of the note was contrary to public policy and morality, and specially that it was barratrous; and because it also appeared that the note itself had not been assigned to the plaintiff before the commencement of the action; and as the plaintiff was not the legal owner thereof, he could not maintain the action. The defendant also moved for a nonsuit upon, substantially, the same grounds. Both his objections…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Poorman v. D. O. Mills & Co.California Supreme Court · 1868
3Cited by7 opinions
- Howard v. SchanielCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980
- Casserleigh v. WoodColorado Court of Appeals · 1900
- Koehne v. HarveyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1946
- Walmsley v. HolcombCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
- Casserleigh v. WoodColorado Court of Appeals · 1900
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.