Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

89 Cal. 186

Langan v. Langan

California Supreme Court

Decided May 26, 1891

California Supreme Court · decided 1891-05-26

County, and from ail order denying a new trial. The following are the fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, and eleventh findings, referred to in the opinion of the court: 4.

Relies on Billings v. Everett

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1891-05-26

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently August 1965

17 state decisions

7018911900191019201930194019501960decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Paterson, J., concurring.

¶1— I concur in the order dismissing the appeal from the judgment. I also concur in the order reversing the order denying the motion for a new trial, on the ground that the findings are uncertain and conflicting.

¶2The contract attached to the note does not, in express terms, declare that the considerations therein named are all (lie considerations for the three-thousand-dollar note, and I think that, under the decision of this court in Billings v. Everett, 52 Cal. 661, the court did not err in its ruling. The matter referred to was expressly alleged as *196a separate defense in the answer, no motion to strike out, or demurrer, was filed, and it was treated at the trial as properly in issue. The plaintiff was himself the first to introduce oral testimony on that issue.

¶3Rehearing denied.

/89/cal/186 · .json · Public domain