James v. E. G. Lyons Co.
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
GRAY, C.
This action is based on an order in words and figures as follows: —
“ $325.00. San Antonio, Mar. 5th, 1897.
“ At sight, pay to the order of D. Sullivan & Co. three hundred and twenty-five dollars, value received, and charge to account of Mayer & Adler.
“ To The E. G. Lyons Co., San Francisco, Cal.”
The order was duly assigned to plaintiff, and he seeks to maintain this action, as appears from his complaint, on the theory that defendant made an unconditional promise, in writing, to accept the order, and thereby actually accepted it, under the provisions of section 3197 of the Civil Code.…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Coolidge v. PaysonSupreme Court of the United States · 1817
- Whilden & Sons v. Merchants' & Planters' National BankSupreme Court of Alabama · 1879
- Merchants' Bank of Canada v. GriswoldNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
- Wilson v. ClementsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1807
- Bissell v. LewisMichigan Supreme Court · 1857
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- In Re Estate of BellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
- Kladivo v. MelbergSupreme Court of Iowa · 1929
- James v. the E.G. Lyons Co.California Supreme Court · 1905
- Pacific Coast Coal Co. v. Lindsay Cooperative Citrus Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
- Postlethwaite v. MinorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914