Damor v. Pardow

34 Cal. 278
California Supreme Court·Decided July 1, 1867·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

By the Court, Sanderson, J.:

The note in suit is the joint and several note of the makers. As between them and the payee they are both principals. If one of the makers received all the consideration, or if one be surety for the other as between themselves, it is a matter about which the payee is not concerned. As to him they are both principals notwithstanding, and hence if the relationship suggested exists between them it cannot be made the subject of judicial inquiry in this action. [281] (Aud v. Magruder, 10 Cal. 288; Dane v. Corduan, 24 Cal. 164; Shriver v. Lovejoy, 32 Cal. 574.)

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Damor v. Pardow, 34 Cal. 278 (Cal. 1867).

34 Cal. 278 (Damor v. Pardow) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Austin v. American Surety Co. of New York
4 P.2d 577 (California Court of Appeal, 1931)
Wolf v. Brakebill
162 P. 918 (California Court of Appeal, 1916)
Eppinger v. Kendrick
46 P. 613 (California Supreme Court, 1896)
California National Bank v. Ginty
41 P. 38 (California Supreme Court, 1895)
Southern California National Bank of Los Angeles v. Wyatt
25 P. 918 (California Supreme Court, 1891)
Chafoin v. Rich
19 P. 882 (California Supreme Court, 1888)
Smith v. Freyler
4 Mont. 489 (Montana Supreme Court, 1882)