Boehmke

Boehmke v. Westfall

Good Law
106 Cal. App. 754·1930 Cal. App. LEXIS 664·289 P. 920
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 27, 1930Docket No. 96.California760 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Cary, J.

From a judgment against her in the sum of $402.82 defendant prosecutes this appeal.

The complaint is as follows:

The amended answer denied all the allegations of the complaint and alleged that the action was barred by the statute of limitations, Code of Civil Procedure, section 339, subdivision 1.

Briefly summarized the evidence is as follows: Plaintiff was the daughter of defendant. She testified that, beginning with November of 1924, she had been loaning defendant money and that each time as she loaned the money she would immediately enter the amount, etc., in a little book ' which she kept for that purpose. This account, introduced by plaintiff without objection, is as follows:

She further testified that defendant had asked her on three different occasions after the last loan how much she owed, and when informed that the amount was $402.82 had made no objection to that figure and had promised to pay. This latter was brought out on cross-examination by defendant’s counsel. Defendant testified that plaintiff had loaned her about $200, although she was not at all clear on the' amount, that plaintiff had told her she had the amount marked down in her little book, that…

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.