Younglove v. Nixon

California Supreme Court

Younglove v. Nixon

61 Cal. 301, 1882 Cal. LEXIS 602

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedAugust 24, 1882

DocketNo. 8,156

StatusPublished

This text of 61 Cal. 301 (Younglove v. Nixon) 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

Younglove v. Nixon, 61 Cal. 301, 1882 Cal. LEXIS 602 (Cal. 1882).

Pincite

Opinion

The Court :

Plaintiff brought this action on a promissory note for one thousand five hundred and ninety-nine dollars and forty-five cents, and the defendant set up several matters of defense in his answer. There was a demurrer to the answer, which was overruled by the Court, and on the trial of the case a verdict was rendered in favor of the defendant. The case comes before this Court on the judgment roll, and appellant assigns as error the order of the Court overruling the demurrer to the answer.

It may be conceded that some portions of the answer are insufficient, but there was enough matter in it, well pleaded, to constitute a good defense to the action. It does not appear from anything found in the transcript, that the error complained of, affected any substantial right of the plaintiff (Sec. 475, C. C. P.); and the judgment is therefore affirmed.

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

The Court :

Plaintiff brought this action on a promissory note for one thousand five hundred and ninety-nine dollars and forty-five cents, and the defendant set up several matters of defense in his answer. There was a demurrer to the answer, which was overruled by the Court, and on the trial of the case a verdict was rendered in favor of the defendant. The case comes before this Court on the judgment roll, and appellant assigns as error the order of the Court overruling the demurrer to the answer.

It may be conceded that some portions of the answer are insufficient, but there was enough matter in it, well pleaded, to constitute a good defense to the action. It does not appear from anything found in the transcript, that the error complained of, affected any substantial right of the plaintiff (Sec. 475, C. C. P.); and the judgment is therefore affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

61 Cal. 301, 1882 Cal. LEXIS 602, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/younglove-v-nixon-cal-1882.