Legal Opinion

Jones v. Walden

California Supreme Court

Decided December 1, 1904No. S.F. No. 3910PublishedCited by 9 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. A. Ruef, for Appellant.

1Opinion of the CourtMcFARLAND, J.

This is an action against the administrator of the estate of James B. Chase, deceased, to recover. $12,180.75 alleged to have been owing from said Chase at the time of his death to plaintiff upon an open, mutual, and current account. Judgment went for defendant and plaintiff appeals from the judgment and from an order denying his motion for a new trial.

The court below held that appellant’s alleged cause of action was barred by section 1498 of the Code of Civil Procedure; and we do not see how this conclusion can be successfully assailed. That section is as follows: “When a claim is rejected…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Consolidated National Bank v. HayesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Donnally v. Montgomery County Welfare BoardCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2001
  2. Raggio v. PalmtagCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
  3. In Re Smith's EstateSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1949
  4. Estate of MooreCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
  5. Robison v. RobisonUtah Supreme Court · 1923

4 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