Pilster v. Highton

California Supreme Court

Pilster v. Highton

31 P. 580, 3 Cal. Unrep. 632

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 26, 1892

DocketNo. 14,510

StatusPublished

This text of 31 P. 580 (Pilster v. Highton) 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

Pilster v. Highton, 31 P. 580, 3 Cal. Unrep. 632 (Cal. 1892).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an action upon a promissory note. The complaint was demurred to upon the grounds that it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and was ambiguous and uncertain. The demurrer was overruled, and the defendant given ten days to answer. He declined to answer, and thereupon judgment was entered against him, from which he appeals. The complaint was inartistically drawn, but we think it must be held sufficient. Judgment affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an action upon a promissory note. The complaint was demurred to upon the grounds that it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and was ambiguous and uncertain. The demurrer was overruled, and the defendant given ten days to answer. He declined to answer, and thereupon judgment was entered against him, from which he appeals. The complaint was inartistically drawn, but we think it must be held sufficient. Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 P. 580, 3 Cal. Unrep. 632, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pilster-v-highton-cal-1892.