Kendall

Kendall v. Parker

Good Law
103 Cal. 319·1894 Cal. LEXIS 772·37 P. 401
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJune 28, 1894No. 18196California1,313 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

This is an appeal from a judgment entered after appellant’s demurrer had been overruled, appellant standing upon his demurrer.

The complaint is upon a promissory note which is non-negotiable, because it contains a stipulation for an *321 attorney’s fee. Suit is brought by the assignee of the first assignee against the makers and the payee as indorser.

The complaint avers that Hill assigned the note by writing his name upon the back thereof, and by delivering the same to the Huntington-Hopkins Company before the maturity of the note.

The Huntington-Hopkins Company, upon the maturity of the note, presented the same to the makers, and demanded payment thereof. The said makers refused and failed to pay the same or any part thereof, of which demand' and failure due notice was given to the defendant Hill. The note was transferred to plaintiff by the Huntington-Hopkins Company, without recourse and after maturity.

The complaint was demurred to on several grounds, all, however, founded upon the proposition that the complaint fails to show any liability on the part of Hill.

Plaintiff had judgment, not only for the debt which the note was given to secure, but for one hundred dollars,…

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.