Legal Opinion

Holmes v. Ohm

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1863PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Appeal from the District Court, Twelfth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco.

1Opinion of the CourtCrocker, J.

This Is an action upon an undertaking on appeal. The defendants demurred to the complaint, on the ground that it did not aver any delivery. The complaint avers that the defendants executed the undertaking sued on, copying the same in full into the complaint, with the indorsement thereon, showing that the undertaking was filed in the Clerk’s office on the twenty-seventh day of March, 1862. This is clearly sufficient to entitle the plaintiff" to recover thereon. These undertakings are not required by the statute to be delivered to the obligee when executed, but to be filed in the Clerk’s…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. Parrott v. ScottMontana Supreme Court · 1887
  2. Howard Ins. Co. of New York v. SilverbergU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern California · 1898
  3. Clark v. DreyerColorado Court of Appeals · 1897
  4. Clark v. DreyerColorado Court of Appeals · 1897

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API