De Casteele v. Cornwall (1855) · DecisionDepot

De Casteele v. Cornwall

Name: California Superior Court Tentative Rulings
Creator: DecisionDepot
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

California Supreme Court Jul 1, 1855Published

Before: Heydenfeldt

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the instrument is not a valid statutory security because it lacks a seal, and the plaintiff lacks standing to sue because the contract was not assigned to them.

Issues

Whether the instrument meets the statutory requirements for a Notary Public's security.
Whether the plaintiff has a right of action in their own name on a contract payable to the State.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The instrument upon which suit is brought, is not under seal, and is therefoz’e nob the character of security which is required by the statute to be given by Notaries Public.”

“as it is payable to the State, and not assigned to the plaintiff, the latter has no right of action in his own name.”

Synopsis

An instrument not under seal, is not the character of security which is required, by the statute to be given by Notaries Public.

If such an instrument be consid red as a good contract at common law, yet, as it is payable to the State, and not assigned to the plaintiff, the latter has no right of action in his own name.

Heydenfeldt, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. Murray, C. J., concurred.

The instrument upon which suit is brought, is not under seal, and is therefoz’e nob the character of security which is required by the statute to be given by Notaries Public.

If it be considered as a good contract at common law, yet as it is payable to the State, and not assigned to the plaintiff, the latter has no right of action in his own name.

Judgment affirmed.

De Casteele v. Cornwall

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief