Legal Opinion

Wetzel v. Cale

California Supreme Court

Decided May 31, 1917No. S. F. No. 7275PublishedCited by 5 opinions

.The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtSloss, J.

This is an action upon a note whereby F. M. Cale promised to pay to L. H. Honey or order the sum of five thousand dollars, with interest, in four installments of one thousand two hundred and fifty dollars each. The instrument contained a provision that, in case any installment was not paid within five days after it became due, the whole of the principal and interest remaining unpaid should forthwith become due and payable at the election of the holder of the note. Before the delivery of the note by Cale to Honey, Mabel G. Cale and J. Jerome Smith indorsed the note by writing their names on…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Union Collection Co. v. BuckmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
  2. National Hardware Co. v. SherwoodCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
  3. Hewitt v. DeanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  4. Lynch v. Superior Court of S.F.California Supreme Court · 1906
  5. Whelan v. SwainCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Boyd v. BearceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
  2. McKeehan v. Pacific Finance Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1932
  3. Saldaña Muñoz v. Rodríguez DíazSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1936
  4. Levy v. LarsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
  5. Saldaña Muñoz v. Rodríguez DíazSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1936

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

Powered by the Exa API