Graham

Graham v. Larimer

Good Law
1890 Cal. LEXIS 660·83 Cal. 173·23 P. 286
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 25, 1890No. 13167California2,502 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Vanclief, J.

— Suit on a promissory note dated June 2, 1888, made by defendant, payable on demand to James Ward or order.

The note was twice assigned before June 4,1888; first, by Ward to George Lord, and second, by Lord to- plaintiff, who demanded payment on June 4, 1888.

Among other defenses, the defendant pleaded “ that said promissory note was signed on a void, illegal, and invalid consideration, in support of which she shows that on June 2, 1888, said James Ward was about to prosecute one Robert Larimer—brother of defendant— on a charge of felony; that said Ward then and there promised and agreed with defendant that if she would sign said note that he would refrain from such prosecution, and keep silent as to the alleged crime; that in consideration of his so doing, at his request the said defendant signed the said promissory note.”

The answer further alleges that each of the assignees of the note had notice of the character and illegality of the consideration at the time of the assignment of the note to him.

Judgment was rendered for the plaintiff for the full amount of principal and interest of the note, and for costs, from which, and from an order denying her motion for a new…

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.