Legal Opinion

Dungan v. Clark

California Supreme Court

Decided December 23, 1910No. Sac. No. 1849PublishedCited by 6 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtSloss, J.

This action was commenced in a justice’s court of Tulare County. The complaint was in two counts, one to recover one hundred and twenty-five dollars together with twenty-five dollars attorney’s fees on a promissory note, and the other to recover $53.99 for electrical power furnished to the defendant at his request.

The defendant filed a verified answer, setting up, as a defense to the action on the note that said note was delivered in consideration of the sale by plaintiff to defendant of a half interest in a pumping plant situated upon a described tract of land, and a like interest in a…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Hart v. Carnall-Hopkins Co.California Supreme Court · 1894
  2. Schroeder v. WittramCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
  3. Holman v. TaylorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
  4. King v. Kutner-Goldstein Co.California Supreme Court · 1901
  5. Copertini v. OppermannCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Bates v. FerrierCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912
  2. Morrissey v. MorrisseyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
  3. Dearcey Stewart v. Matthew CateCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
  4. Hebert v. GrayCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  5. People v. PeetCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930

1 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