Taylor v. Reynolds
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, San Francisco. Judgment was rendered for the plaintiff, and the defendant appealed. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court :
The plaintiff and the defendant’s testator were co-sureties for Preston on a promissory note. The plaintiff paid the amount due on the promissory note, and brought this action against his co-surety for contribution. The defendant, after denying the alleged payment by the plaintiff, avers upon his information and belief that before the making of the note Preston deposited with the plaintiff a large amount of available collateral securities of a value more than the amount of the note, “ the said plaintiff having the full and entire control of the said collateral securities, to…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Goodall v. WentworthSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1841
- Sloo v. PoolIllinois Supreme Court · 1853
- Hinton v. FoxCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1823
- Henderson v. HenrySupreme Court of Alabama · 1844
3Cited by6 opinions
- Jackson v. LacyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
- Croft v. BainMontana Supreme Court · 1914
- Lex v. Selway Steel CorporationSupreme Court of Iowa · 1925
- Myers v. Sierra Valley Stock & Agricultural Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- Holm v. BurnellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.