Petray

Petray v. First National Bank

Good Law
1928 Cal. App. LEXIS 410·92 Cal. App. 86·267 P. 711
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 21, 1928Docket No. 5451.California1,139 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Shaw, J.

The plaintiff appeals from a judgment in favor of the defendant, and from an order denying her motion that the judgment be vacated and a new judgment in her favor be entered upon the findings. The record upon which both appeals are presented contains the judgment-roll and a bill of exceptions showing the proceedings upon the motion, but none of the evidence given at the trial. We must therefore presume that the evidence supported the findings, and construe the latter as strongly as their language will permit in favor of the judgment, resolving any uncertainties therein against the appellant. The important facts are set forth in the following findings:

Plaintiff argues, in support of her appeal, that by the deposit of her money in' the defendant bank, the relation of debtor and creditor was created between her and the bank, that the facts stated in the findings do not amount to a novation by which Bussell was substituted for the bank as her debtor, and that hence the bank remains liable to her for the amount of the deposit. We are inclined to regard the two premises of the argument as correct, but the conclusion stated does not follow therefrom. The liability of a debtor may be…

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.