6 Cal. 141, Rich v. Davis

Citation6 Cal. 141
Opinion JudgeHEYDENFELDT, Judge
Party NameRICH v. DAVIS
AttorneyBuckner & Hill, for Appellant. Robinson, Beatty & Sackett, for Respondent.
Judge PanelJUDGES: The opinion of the Court was delivered by Mr. Justice Heydenfeldt. Mr. Chief Justice Murray concurred.
Case DateApril 01, 1856
CourtSupreme Court of California

Page 141

6 Cal. 141

RICH

v.

DAVIS

Supreme Court of California

April, 1856

Appeal from the District Court of the Tenth Judicial District, County of Nevada.

COUNSEL

Buckner & Hill, for Appellant.

Robinson, Beatty & Sackett, for Respondent.

JUDGES: The opinion of the Court was delivered by Mr. Justice Heydenfeldt. Mr. Chief Justice Murray concurred.

OPINION

HEYDENFELDT, Judge

This was an action brought on certain promissory notes. The main defense is, that the notes were made by one partner in the firm name, but for his own private uses.

This defense would be good against a holder with notice of the fraud.

Page 142

But it is found by the District Court as a fact, that the plaintiff is an innocent holder, in which case the recovery cannot be defeated. The principle involved we decided in this case when it was here before. (See 4 Cal. 22.)

The remaining defense rests upon the claim of certain payments. As to these, the Court below finds that they were adjudicated upon as set-offs in another suit between the same parties. This is sufficient to...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP