Rocca v. Klein
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tuolumne County, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Belcher, C. C.
This is an action to recover the sum of $387.25, balance alleged to be due plaintiff from defendant on a mutual, open, and current account.
By his answer, the defendant denied that the account between the parties was mutual, open, and current, and alleged that the plaintiff’s action was barred by the provisions of subdivision 1 of section 339 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
The court found against the plaintiff as to all of the account, except $43.59, which accrued within two years prior to the commencement of the action, and for which judgment was rendered in his favor.
The…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Norton v. LarcoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
- Warren v. SweeneyNevada Supreme Court · 1868
- Adams v. PattersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
3Cited by5 opinions
- Clement v. State Reclamation BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
- Carter v. CantyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
- Santa Rosa National Bank v. BarnettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Anderson v. Associated Investment Co.California Court of Appeal · 1963
- Clement v. State Reclamation BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950