Gardner v. Trigg
Arizona Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtLockwood, C. J.
— C. H. Trigg, plaintiff, brought suit against H. L. Gardner, defendant, upon a certain written promise to pay, which is hereinafter set out. Defendant answered, claiming (a) that the promise to pay was conditional only and out of a specified fund which had ceased to exist, and (b) that the obligation had been paid by the sale of certain property. He also filed a cross complaint for goods sold and delivered by him to plaintiff, and later filed a second, third and fourth cross complaint, which last three were stricken by the court.
The case was tried to the court without a jury, and judgment…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. SalterSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1927
- Clay-Butler Lumber Co. v. W. H. Pickering Lumber Co.Texas Commission of Appeals · 1925
- Hoover v. OdleArizona Supreme Court · 1926
- Haggard v. Mutual Oil & Refining Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1924
- In re the Transfer Tax upon the Exercise of the Power of Appointment Conferred by the Last Will & Testament of FearingAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1910
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Central Housing Inv. Corp. v. Federal Nat. Mortg. Ass'nArizona Supreme Court · 1952
- Bowen v. WatzCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1967