Belleau v. Thompson
This text of 33 Cal. 495 (Belleau v. Thompson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The matter contained in the answer of Stow may constitute a good defence to the action, hut it does not constitute a counter claim upon which he can obtain any relief against the plaintiff. A counter claim is a cause of action in favor of the defendant upon which he might have sued the plaintiff and obtained affirmative relief in a separate action. Had Stow sued the plaintiff in a separate action, upon the facts stated in his answer, what relief could he have obtained ? Nothing short of a cancellation of the note, or his indorsement thereon, would afford him’ any relief. He could have obtained neither, for the plaintiff* notwithstanding she may not be able to recover against Stow, is entitled to hold the note as against Thompson, and to hold the indorsement of Stow for the purpose of malting title.
Order affirmed.
Neither Mr. Justice Shatter nor Mr. Chief Justice Currey expressed an opinion.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
33 Cal. 495, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/belleau-v-thompson-cal-1867.