Pacific Portland Cement Co. v. Reinecke
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco, and from an order denying a new trial. Frank J. Murasky, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtLennon, P. J.
On September 24, 1910, the Metropolis Construction Company executed to the plaintiff two promissory notes for one thousand three hundred and seven dollars and two thousand dollars, respectively, upon which the plain tiff secured a judgment against the defendant, as the guarantor and indorser of the notes, in the sum of $3,680.25, which included interest from the date of the notes. It is an admitted fact in the case that the defendant signed both notes on the back thereof at the same time in the dual capacity of guarantor and indorser.
The plaintiff’s complaint sets forth four causes of action.…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- People v. MilnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- People v. JonesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- Adams v. HopkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Moore v. GouldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- Williams v. HawleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Smellie v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1931
- Westberg v. WilldeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
- Mar Shee v. Maryland Assurance Corp.California Supreme Court · 1922
- Randolph v. HuntCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
- Scott v. SheedyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.