Bull

Bull v. Eby

Good Law
1 Cal. Unrep. 281
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMay 31, 1866No. 920California603 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Sawyer, J.

Action upon a promissory note and to foreclose a mortgage given to secure it. Upon trial of the issues relating to payment, and satisfaction, the defendant requested the court to give to the jury the following instruction, viz.:

The court refused and defendant excepted, and the refusal of this instruction is the only ruling complained of in appellant’s brief. The amount due on. the note was much larger than two thousand five hundred dollars. The solution of the legal problem presented depends upon the question as to whether the proposition presented by the instruction is, that the agreement to accept, and the acceptance of a less sum than, the amount due, is a satisfaction of the larger sum; or that the agreement to accept certain specified amounts, notes of other parties and other property of a value less than the *282 amount due is a satisfaction. If the former is the legal proposition involved in the instruction, the court was right in, refusing it; for it is well settled that a payment of a part of a sum due is not a satisfaction of the whole, notwithstanding the payment is made and received in pursuance of an agreement that it shall be in satisfaction of the entire demand.…

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.