Hunt

Hunt v. Glassell

Good Law
1916 Cal. App. LEXIS 113·30 Cal. App. 676·159 P. 227
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 7, 1916Civ. No. 1980.California1,641 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Conrey, J.

By his original complaint in this action, filed on December 15, 1911, the plaintiff, as successor in right to Duquesne Brewing Company, a corporation, demanded judgment upon a certain promissory note for the sum of ten thousand dollars, dated September 25, 1907, and payable one year after date. On June 3, 1913, the plaintiff filed an amended complaint setting forth a note of same date and amount as before and in like terms, except that it read “ten months after date” instead of one year after date, and" omitted the provision for interest contained in the note set out in the original complaint. A demurrer to the amended complaint having been sustained, the plaintiff, on the thirty-first day of July, 1913, filed his second amended complaint, and therein alleged the execution of a note in the same terms as the note set out in the first amended complaint. The second amended complaint states facts showing that at the time of commencement of this action the plaintiff was unable to see the note or obtain a copy thereof, and was obliged to rely upon his recollection of its terms, plaintiff having seen the note at about the date it was made; alleging also that there was but one ten…

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.