Anderson

Sunset Milling & Grain Co. v. Anderson

Good Law
1952 Cal. LEXIS 304·39 Cal. 2d 773·249 P.2d 24
Supreme Court of CaliforniaOctober 24, 1952L. A. 22396California2,814 words

Opinion

Opinion

Edmonds, J.

The Sunset Milling and Grain Company sued to recover the amount of principal and interest due upon a series of nine promissory notes executed and delivered to it by O. E. Anderson, doing business as Anderson Feed Store. Its appeal from a judgment of nonsuit challenges the correctness of the trial court’s determination that an agreement pleaded by Anderson was a complete defense to the action.

By his answer, Anderson admitted the execution and delivery of the notes and alleged that they were made without consideration. The pleader then alleged the following facts:

Ralph Bangenter was field representative for Sunset Milling ; C. Trevor Sawday its local salesman and representative. These men told Anderson that Milton Morgan was selling a feed business operated by him and from which Charles J. Brust had been buying Sunset Milling’s feed. According to them, Morgan had taken Brust’s promissory notes and given them, with duplicate notes of his own, to Sunset Milling for the feed sold. Bangenter and Sawday also represented to Anderson that the notes given, and to be given, by Brust were and would be secured by a chattel mortgage upon chickens which he was raising. As a bookkeeping…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.