Legal Opinion

Gaddis v. Grant

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 23, 1919No. Civ. No. 1942PublishedCited by 9 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.

The action was brought to recover the amount due on a promissory note and to foreclose a mortgage given to secure the payment of the same. Defendant filed a demurrer to the complaint on the grounds, “That the said complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action,” and, “That said complaint is uncertain in this, that it does not appear therefrom how much money has been paid, either on account of principal or interest on said promissory note, or, in what manner or how the amount of interest stated to be now due and owing on said note is calculated, or how such an amount…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Canadian & American Mortgage & Trust Co. v. Clarita Land & Investment Co.California Supreme Court · 1903
  2. Bank of Lemoore v. FulghamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
  3. Alexander v. Central Lumber & Mill Co.California Supreme Court · 1894
  4. Long Beach City School District v. DodgeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
  5. Jensen v. DorrCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Meyer v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
  2. Johnston v. DelayNevada Supreme Court · 1945
  3. Shook v. PearsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
  4. Genger v. AlbersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
  5. State Medical Education Board v. RobersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970

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