Curtis

Curtis v. Wasem

Good Law
1929 Cal. App. LEXIS 54·96 Cal. App. 604·274 P. 607
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 4, 1929Docket No. 6200.California619 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Crail, J.

This is an action on a promissory note. No question is raised as to the execution and delivery of the note to the payee, David Robbins. The plaintiff is his sister and alleges that she is his assignee. As a defense the defendants set up in their answer that the note was without consideration and was delivered to David Robbins conditionally ; that the note was a part of a transaction whereby he conditionally sold his confectionery store at Clifton, Arizona, to defendants; that the sale was not to be completed and the note was not to become a promissory note unless Robbins should die in the military service of the United States and in that event only should the defendants become liable for payment of said note; that he was discharged alive from military service, but failed to return the note or take back his confectionery.

It was set up in the complaint that the note, before maturity, for a valuable consideration, was sold and delivered to the plaintiff; but this position was abandoned by the plaintiff and nothing further need be said on this issue.

The parties went to trial on the affirmative defenses set forth in the answer. The court found for the plaintiff as to all the facts…

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.