Gray v. Garrison

California Supreme Court

Gray v. Garrison

9 Cal. 325

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 1, 1858

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 9 Cal. 325 (Gray v. Garrison) 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.

Bluebook

Gray v. Garrison, 9 Cal. 325 (Cal. 1858).

Pincite

Opinion

Field, J., delivered the opinion of the Court—Burnett, J., concurring.

The demand in suit was assignable, and its transfer gave a right of action in the name of the assignee. The assignor was a competent witness, and his testimony should have been admitted. The action is not brought for an unliquidated demand, and is not, therefore, embraced within the exception contained in the concluding clause of the fourth section of the Practice Act.

Judgment reversed, and cause remanded.

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

Field, J., delivered the opinion of the Court—Burnett, J., concurring.

The demand in suit was assignable, and its transfer gave a right of action in the name of the assignee. The assignor was a competent witness, and his testimony should have been admitted. The action is not brought for an unliquidated demand, and is not, therefore, embraced within the exception contained in the concluding clause of the fourth section of the Practice Act.

Judgment reversed, and cause remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

9 Cal. 325, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gray-v-garrison-cal-1858.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack