Boyd v. Williston
1 Cal. Dist. Ct. 215
This text of 1 Cal. Dist. Ct. 215 (Boyd v. Williston) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California District Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Boyd v. Williston, 1 Cal. Dist. Ct. 215 (Cal. Super. Ct. 1857).
Opinion
held that Flint was the first endorser, and could not, therefore, maintain an action on the note against Williston, who was the second endorser. The plaintiff, taking the note after it became due, was in no better position than Flint. Parol evidence is not admissible, in an action on the note, to prove that Williston intended to become first endorser.
Judgment for defendant.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
1 Cal. Dist. Ct. 215, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/boyd-v-williston-caldistct-1857.