Jerome v. Stebbins
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Tenth District. Plaintiff had judgment; defendant, Stebbins, appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtCope, J.
This is an action on two promissory notes against the maker and indorser. The defense is by the indorser alone. The notes-are payable on demand, and were executed on the 3d of October,. *4581857, and indorsed to the plaintiff on the 7th of the same month, but were not presented for payment until the 11th of Hovember, 1858. These facts appear in the complaint, and no excuse is alleged for the delay in demanding payment. The defendant demurred generally for insufficiency, and the demurrer was overruled.
The plaintiff was not entitled to recover upon the facts stated in the complaint. The demand…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Daley v. RussCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- O'Connor v. DingleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
- Aronson v. Frankfort Accident & Plate Glass InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1908
- Seebach v. KuhnCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1908
- Johnson v. County of Santa ClaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.