Adams v. Wallace
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the • Superior Court of - the City and County of San Francisco. -William B. Daingerfield, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.
Appeal from the judgment, the evidence being brought up for review by a hill of exceptions.
Plaintiff sued David T. Pierce and Emeline Wallace, averring the following facts: That one David T. Pierce, for a valuable consideration, made and executed to plaintiff his promissory note for the sum of eight thousand dollars, with interest at the rate *69of eight per cent per annum until paid. “That, for the purpose of securing the payment of said promissory note, defendant Emetine Wallace did, upon the same day, and for a valuable consideration, make, execute and deliver to plaintiff her promissory note…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Bull v. CoeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- London, Paris, & Am. Bank, Ltd. v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Cole v. Merchants BankIndiana Supreme Court · 1877
3Cited by26 opinions
- Burke v. MaguireCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
- Martin v. BeckerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
- Everts v. MattesonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Cooke v. MesmerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Pierce v. MerrillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.