Daniels

Daniels v. Daniels

Good Law
1906 Cal. App. LEXIS 158·3 Cal. App. 294·85 P. 134
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 22, 1906Civ. No. 117.California1,736 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

McLAUGHLIN, J.

It appears from the complaint herein that on the fifth day of June, 1897, at Chicago, Illinois, Newell Daniels and Sarah L. Daniels made and executed their promissory note for $1,000 without interest, payable to Walter A. Daniels at his office in Chicago upon demand, and at the same time and place made and executed a similar note for a like amount to Adelaide M. and Cora Jean Daniels. That at the time the said notes were so made and executed, and as a part of the same transaction, the payors, who were described as residents of the state of California, as parties of the first part, the payees, as sole heirs at law of Leo H. Daniels, deceased, as parties of the second part, and one James A. Stoddard of Chicago, as party of the third part, entered into an agreement in writing, reciting the execution of the two notes, in renewal of two notes given to secure the payment of sixty-one shares of stock in the Milwaukee Cranberry Company, representing an interest in six hundred and eighty acres of land in Wisconsin, and recording their mutual agreement with regard thereto, which was, in substance, as follows: It was mutually covenanted that the two notes be placed in the keeping of the…

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.