Holmes

Coast Bank v. Holmes

Good Law
19 Cal. App. 3d 581·1971 Cal. App. LEXIS 1305·97 Cal. Rptr. 30
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 24, 1971Civ. 10509California5,353 words

Opinion

Opinion

Tamura, J.

Plaintiff (Bank) brought the present action on a promissory note to recover the principal ($51,053), accrued interest, and attorney fees. Defendant (Holmes) admitted execution of the note but pleaded failure of consideration, nonoccurrence of conditions precedent, constructive fraud and illegality. He also cross-complained for reformation. Except as to illegality, the court found in favor of defendant on all affirmative defenses and adjudged that plaintiff take nothing on the complaint. In addition, the judgment decreed reformation of the note as prayed for in the cross-complaint and awarded defendant attorney’s fees in the sum of $9,836. The Bank appeals from the judgment.

The decisive issues posed by this appeal are: (1) Whether the admission of evidence to prove the affirmative defenses constituted a violation of the parol evidence rule and (2) whether the award of attorney’s fees pursuant to Civil Code section 1717, constituted an invalid retroactive application of the statute.

The facts may be summarized as follows: The Bank had made loans to one David Reid and others with Reid apparently being the ultimate beneficiary. In late 1965, as a result of a bank…

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.