Fisher

Fisher v. Cheeseman

Good Law
1968 Cal. App. LEXIS 1880·260 Cal. App. 2d 503·67 Cal. Rptr. 258
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 27, 1968Civ. 31274California1,054 words

Opinion

Opinion

Bishop, J.

pro tem. —Defendant Cheeseman appealed from the summary judgment entered against him upon plaintiff’s motion. We are reversing the judgment.

The complaint alleged the making of a promissory note on April 20, 1959, whereby defendant Cheeseman and the two other defendants promised to pay Florence May $43,500 in monthly installments of $300. Default in a monthly payment would render the entire balance due, at the option of the holder. The present plaintiff became the holder on the first day of July 1961, at which times several monthly payments were allegedly in default, $37,800 remaining unpaid. That is the sum, plus interest and attorney fees, for which plaintiff sought and obtained judgment.

An answer was filed by defendant Cheeseman, in which he denied that any sum remained due and unpaid, although he admitted that he had not made any of the payments alleged to be delinquent. The denial is not surprising in view of his affirmative defense, which was that in July of 1960, Florence May and he had entered into an oral agreement “that the Corporation would substitute itself as the maker on the note for the sum of Forty Three Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($43,500.00); that the…

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.