Legal Opinion

Edmonds v. H. W. Wilcox

California Supreme Court

Decided May 3, 1918No. L. A. No. 4210. Department TwoPublishedCited by 20 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtWilbur, J.

This is an action brought by the plaintiff to recover judgment upon two promissory notes assigned to him for collection. These notes were given in renewal of notes given in payment of a subscription for stock in the Western Underwriting and Mortgage Company, one to each of two banks. Subsequently, on April 4, 1913, the defendant executed renewal notes. It is claimed by defendant that the original notes were procured by fraudulent representations. But the appellant claims that at the time of the giving of the renewal notes, April 4, 1913, plaintiff had become aware of the fraud, and that,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. The Edward Barron Estate Co. v. the Woodruff Co.California Supreme Court · 1912
  2. De Kahn v. ChaseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Hobart v. Hobart Estate Co.California Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Treadwell v. NickelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  3. Liodas v. SahadiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
  4. Mayfield v. Fidelity & Casualty Co.California Court of Appeal · 1936
  5. Sloan v. StearnsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955

15 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