Whelan v. Shain
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco and from an order denying a new trial. J. M. Seawell, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Belcher, C.
On January 5, 1895, the defendant, Joseph E. Shain, commenced an action against William Binz and B. Martella upon their joint promissory note, signed “ Wm. Binz,” “ B. Martella,” and caused to be attached certain personal property belonging to a copartnership, of which they were the only members. On January 16, 1895, judgment was entered in the action that-he “ have and recover from B. Martella and William Binz, defendants,” the sum of fourteen hundred and ten dollars and sixty cents, as prayed for.
*328On January 8, 1895, the defendant, J. S. Reid, commenced an action against the same…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hughes v. DevlinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863
- Conroy v. WoodsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1859
- Robinson v. TevisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
- Chase v. SteelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
- Jones v. ParsonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Quintana Hermanos v. S. Ramírez & Co.Supreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1915
- Drexel Furniture Co. v. Bank of DearingSupreme Court of Georgia · 1933
- Quintana Bros. v. S. Ramírez & Co.Supreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1915