Stone v. Hammell
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from Superior Court, Santa Barbara County; R. M. Dillard, Judge. Action by H. P. Stone against James Hammell to recover $1,000 and interest. Judgment for plaintiff and defendant appeals. Code of Civil Procedure sections 337, 339, provide that an action founded upon a writing executed in said state must be brought within four years after the right of action accrues, and an action upon a contract, etc., not founded upon a writing, within two years thereafter.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Superior Court, Santa Barbara County; R. M. Dillard, Judge. Action by H. P. Stone against James Hammell to recover $1,000 and interest. Judgment for plaintiff and defendant appeals. Code of Civil Procedure sections 337, 339, provide that an action founded upon a writing executed in said state must be brought within four years after the right of action accrues, and an action upon a contract, etc., not founded upon a writing, within two years thereafter. Section 351 provides that, when the right of action against a person accrues during his absence from the state, such action may be…
1Opinion of the Court
FOOTE, C.
This action was brought by the plaintiff to recover from the defendant the sum of $1,000 and interest. *130It is alleged in the complaint that the plaintiff, with three other persons, became the sureties of the defendant upon a promissory note, payable to one Byron Stevens, for the sum of $3,000, the money borrowed, for which the note was given, being for the use and benefit of the defendant, and received and used by him alone; that the defendant neglected to pay the note, or any part of it; that Newell, one of the sureties, paid upon the note, as principal and interest, the sum of…
Also in this document: Per curiam.
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Griffith v. GroganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1859
- In re Estate of HillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
- Rhodes v. BordenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885