Legal Opinion

Flournoy v. Flournoy

California Supreme Court

Decided November 5, 1890No. 13732PublishedCited by 26 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court,

1Opinion of the CourtWorks, J.

This is an action brought by a wife against her husband to recover upon a promissory note, and for money had and received. The defendant set up a counterclaim for money loaned. The court below found in favor of the plaintiff on the note, and for a part of the amount claimed by her for money had and received, and allowed the defendant a part of his counterclaim. The plaintiff appeals on the judgment roll. There is no controversy as to the correctness of the finding and judgment upon the note and the counterclaim. The contest *290is as to the amount allowed the plaintiff for money had £nd received.…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Schuyler v. BroughtonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
  2. Higgins v. HigginsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1873
  3. Taylor v. OpperMarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  4. Swain v. DuaneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
  5. Curtis v. ParksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Dunn v. MullanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
  2. In Re Estate of BradyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
  3. Randall v. Department of InstitutionsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
  4. Kenney v. KenneyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
  5. Provost v. ProvostCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929

21 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