Griswold

Griswold v. Morrison

Good Law
1921 Cal. App. LEXIS 360·53 Cal. App. 93·200 P. 62
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 7, 1921Civ. No. 3312.California5,721 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Finlayson, J.

This is an action on a promissory note for $1,000, dated May 29, 1919, and executed by defendants to one Akers as payment for certain hogs bought by defendants from Akers. The latter, before the maturity of the note, indorsed and delivered it to plaintiff, who, claiming to be an innocent indorsee in due course of business, for value and without notice of any infirmity in the instrument, sues defendants as the makers. The case was tried before a jury, the verdict was in favor of defendants, and from a judgment that he take nothing by the action plaintiff appeals.

In their answer, defendants set up two affirmative defenses and four counterclaims. In their first affirmative defense (designated in the answer as the second defense, the first defense consisting of denials), defendants allege, in substance and effect, that plaintiff and Akers owned the hogs, or plaintiff had some interest therein; that defendants purchased the hogs for the purpose of fattening them for the market, which fact was communicated to plaintiff and Akers; that the hogs were not sound hut were suffering from cholera; that plaintiff and Akers knew the condition of the hogs at the time of the sale but defendants…

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.