Legal Opinion

American National Bank v. Stanfill

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 9, 1988No. Docket Nos. F008513, F008696PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

SARKISIAN, J. *

Introduction

Appellants Gary Stanfill and James Nelson file separate appeals from a judgment in favor of American National Bank and against appellants following the granting of the bank’s motion for summary judgment. Appellants seek reversal of the judgment enforcing appellants’ obligations as makers of a promissory note in favor of payee bank. The appeals have been consolidated. As we explain below, the judgment in favor of the bank must be reversed.

Statement of Facts

In June 1984, Stanfill, Nelson and Mailloux developed a program to assist battered and abused women to be…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Loucks v. Albuquerque National BankNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1966
  2. Gombos v. AsheCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
  3. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  4. Fraser-Yamor Agency, Inc. v. County of Del NorteCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
  5. Powell v. Standard Brands Paint Co.California Court of Appeal · 1985

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Nymark v. Heart Federal Savings & Loan Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
  2. Saldana v. Globe-Weis Systems Co.California Court of Appeal · 1991
  3. Dodd v. Citizens Bank of Costa MesaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990
  4. Roy Supply, Inc. v. Wells Fargo BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
  5. Schoenfelder v. Arizona BankArizona Supreme Court · 1990

10 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