Developers Small Business Investment Corporation v. Robert G. Hoeckle

Good Law
395 F.2d 80
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 13, 196821849California2,720 words

Opinion

Opinion

395 F.2d 80 DEVELOPERS SMALL BUSINESS INVESTMENT CORPORATION, a corporation, Appellant, v. Robert G. HOECKLE, Blanche Bateman, Jean N. Bell, Surjit Singh, H. Linn Hinkle, Louis Bonomi and Edmond V. Bayer, Appellees. No. 21849. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. May 13, 1968. Kurt W. Melchior (argued), David Self, of Severson, Werson, Berke & Bull, San Francisco, Cal., for appellant. Robert A. Thompson (argued), of Gottesman & Thompson, San Francisco, Cal., James B. McKenney, of Pendergrass, McKenney, Perry & Ward, San Rafael, Cal., for appellees. Before POPE, BROWNING and CARTER, Circuit Judges. JAMES M. CARTER, Circuit Judge. 1 This appeal involves an action on a guaranty executed by the appellees individually, (hereafter 'Appellees'). This action was grounded for jurisdiction on diversity of citizenship under 28 U.S.C. 1332. This court's jurisdiction rests on 28 U.S.C. 1291. 2 Two questions are involved, (1) whether the law of New Jersey or California applies, and (2) whether under applicable law, the holder of a guaranty may enforce its obligation by an action on the guaranty without first exhausting its security under a deed of trust secured by a…

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.