Dysert

Dysert v. Weaver

Good Law
1920 Cal. App. LEXIS 750·46 Cal. App. 576·189 P. 492
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 16, 1920Civ. No. 3176.California400 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Finlayson, J.

This is an action upon a promissory note executed by defendants. Plaintiffs are the payees named in the note.

[1] Upon the trial, when plaintiffs sought to introduce their evidence, defendants objected upon the ground that the complaint does not state a cause of action. It is claimed that there is no sufficient allegation of nonpayment. The complaint alleges that “ninety-one dollars and eighty-seven cents ($91.87), the interest on said promissory note to October 7, 1916, has been paid, and that no other or further sum has been paid thereon.” Appellants contend that the word “thereon” modifies the word “interest,” and that this allegation amounts to no more than an averment that no more has been paid on the interest than ninety-one dollars and eighty-seven cents. We cannot assent to this construction of the plain and unambiguous language of the complaint. We think it quite clear that the word “thereon” refers to the words “promissory note,” and that the allegation is equivalent to an averment that all the interest that accrued up to October 7, 1916, has been paid, and that no other or further sum has been paid on the note.

[2] There is no merit in the contention that 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.