Dungan v. Clark
California Supreme Court
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
- Hart v. Carnall-Hopkins Co.California Supreme Court · 1894
- Schroeder v. WittramCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
- Holman v. TaylorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
- King v. Kutner-Goldstein Co.California Supreme Court · 1901
- Copertini v. OppermannCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Bates v. FerrierCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912
- Morrissey v. MorrisseyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
- Dearcey Stewart v. Matthew CateCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
- Hebert v. GrayCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
- People v. PeetCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.